DNC chief tells whopper about Clinton

WorldNetDaily.com ^ | Tuesday, August 13, 2002 | Paul Sperry

[JohnHuang2]

WASHINGTON -- Here we go again.

Democratic National Committee Chairman Terry McAuliffe, long-time fund-raising pal of ex-President Clinton, told a whopper Sunday about his old boss on ABC's "This Week," while attacking President Bush as part of a GOP-bashing campaign before the midterm elections.

McAuliffe maintained that, unlike Bush, Clinton took the high ground and didn't "blame his predecessors" for the economic woes he inherited in 1993.

"There are 1.6 million Americans today who have lost their jobs since George Bush became president. And what does this administration do? All they do is blame others," he told ABC's Sam Donaldson.

"When Bill Clinton became president, he had a 7 percent unemployment rate. We were in a recession (and) he had the largest budget deficit in the history of our country," McAuliffe went on.

"Did he blame his predecessors?" he said. "No, he got to work. He brought Democrats, Republicans together."

His statement is demonstrably untrue, yet Donaldson left it unchallenged and quickly moved on to the next question ("Let's talk about your party, the Democratic Party. Joe Lieberman ...").

Luckily, Lexis-Nexis -- the database that archives old media articles and transcripts of speeches and press conferences going back decades -- doesn't have as short a memory as Donaldson or McAuliffe.

Here are just a few of the many complaints that Clinton, as both president and candidate, made about what he called the "failed" economic policies of his Republican predecessors, Presidents Bush and Reagan (who, it should be noted, implemented markedly different fiscal policies during their terms, despite Clinton's attempt to link them together as one seamless policy over their combined 12 years).

• "Twenty-one months ago, I moved to Washington. Remember the challenges we faced when I went there? We'd had four years of the slowest economic growth since the Great Depression, four years in which Pennsylvania lost 8,300 jobs," Clinton reminded party faithful at an Oct. 31, 1994, fund-raiser for Pennsylvanian Democratic candidates.

  "We were dealing with 12 years of trickle-down Reaganomics, which exploded our deficits and sent our jobs overseas, and divided our people," Clinton added.

• Clinton piled it on a month later in a Dec. 2, 1994, speech to the National League of Cities: "We've worked too hard to build an economic recovery and a job strategy, and to reduce this deficit that 12 years of irresponsible, explosive spending left us."

• Clinton had kicked off the year with the same negative theme, lecturing Republicans in Congress in his Jan. 25, 1994, State of the Union speech: "For the 12 years of trickle-down economics, we built a false prosperity on a hollow basis.

  "Our national debt quadrupled," he added. "From 1989 to 1992, we experienced the slowest growth in a half-century."

• On July 28, 1993, Clinton told reporters gathered at the White House: "For 12 years, we have followed a path that worked in the short run, but caused us great grief in the long time -- and that is supply-side economics, which basically says we're going to cut taxes and increase spending.

  "It took us from a $1 (trillion) to a $4 trillion debt (and) a huge deficit," he added.

• On July 17, 1992, candidate Clinton told a crowd outside his hotel in York, Pa.: "We are in the grip of a failed economic program."

  "Trickle-down has had 12 years," he added. "I'm tired of it. We're not going to do the same thing for four more years."

• In announcing his candidacy in Little Rock, Ark., on Oct. 3, 1991, Clinton said: "For 12 years, the Republicans have been telling us at the national level that America's problems are not their problems. They have washed their hands of responsibility for the economy."

• Then there's Clinton's statements in his "Putting People First" campaign pamphlet: "For twelve years, the driving idea behind American economic policy has been cutting taxes on the richest individuals and corporations and hoping that their new wealth would 'trickle down' to the rest of us.

  "This policy has failed," he said. "The Republicans in Washington have compiled the worst economic record in 50 years."

Referring to other incendiary statements McAuliffe made about Bush in a DNC speech over the weekend, Republican National Committee Chairman Marc Racicot said his counterpart is prone to "hyperbole," but stopped short of calling him dishonest.

"He is incredibly inaccurate," he told the Sean Hannity radio show Monday, "and sometimes almost reckless."

[JohnHuang2]

Tuesday, August 13, 2002

Quote of the Day by My2Cents

[JohnHuang2]

Bush is a Winner. Gore is a Loser. Get over it.

Terry McAuliffe does it again. The DNC chairman and head of the Democrat Party inserted his size 12 foot in his mouth Sunday, accusing Bush of having stolen the 2000 presidential election from poor Albert.

Albert who?

Albert Gore, former Veep, lockbox, 'people versus the powerful' -- ring a bell?

"He [Gore] was robbed, that's a fact!", he told Sam Donaldson on ABC's The Week. Gore has to "get up every morning knowing that" he "got half a million more votes than George Bush did", he whined.

Oh, the agony! Oh, the pain!

Gee, but didn't the Tennessee slumlord ultimately concede the election? "Tonight, for the sake of our unity ... and the strength of our democracy, I offer my concession", Mr Snippy said on December 13, 2000, 36 insufferable days after endless "recounts", 'hanging chads', 'swinging chads', 'dimpled chads', 'pimpled chads', 'pregnant chads', 'deadbeat chads', etc., etc. For weeks, Gore frantically tried to steal the election -- but failed.

That's a fact.

Or is Mr. Buddhist Temple retracting his concession?

Gazillions of media 'recounts' conducted since only confirm Bush won fair-and-square.

That's a fact, too.

Besides, methinks 'Ice Tea' Al needs a refresher course in the U.S. Constitution. Presidents aren't elected by popular vote, but by electoral votes. The electoral college system is found in Article II, section I of the constitution. In the U.S., presidential elections consist of 50 statewide contests: The candidate who gets the most electoral votes, wins. Simple as that.

Too simple to grasp for McAuliffe, I suppose.

Oops! Never mind...I forgot...we're talking about 'no-controlling-legal-authority' Al here.

Back to the ABC interview:

Asked to explain his complaint that no Democrat was invited to Bush's upcoming Economic Forum in Waco, McAuliffe stumbled and staggered. When Donaldson noted that no less than 43 'forum attendees' are generous donors to Democrat candidates and 'party organizations' -- to the tune of over $255,000 since 1990 -- McAuliffe tripped all over his 'answer'.

"Because they [The White House] put out a list of...this is not a fundraiser, Sam!"

Well, duh.

Of course it isn't, Terry. That's the precisely point. Were this the Clinton White House, it would be. That's the difference.

Nor did he offer a credible explanation for the 'killing' he made in Global Crossing, turning a $100,000 initial "investment" into a mindboggling $18,000,000 shortly thereafter. McAuliffe, at the time, was trying to hook up pal Gary Winnick, company CEO, with the Clinton White House. The $18 million smacks of insider trading: The stock was dumped just before Global Crossing went belly-up.

How did McAuliffe know the company was about to tank? Nothing he said quelled the cloud of suspicion he's under.

His 'alibi' doesn't pass the laugh test.

McAuliffe was also asked about controversial remarks during his froth-in-the-mouth tirade in Las Vegas, where Democrats were holding their summer conference. The speech was an orgy of ad hominem attacks, charging the President with "exploiting" 9/11 for political gain.

A sweeping indictment of the Bush administration, the media called it.

Ah, don't think so. 'Indictment' ascribes merit to the charges. There are no merits. McAuliff's attacks were not only baseless, they were utterly ridiculous.

And -- upon closer scrutiny -- brimming with contradictions.

McAuliffe, in one breath, trashes the President of using 9/11 for political reasons. But then, in the next, slams him for failing to use 9/11 for action on Social Security, health care, the economy.

McAuliffe blasts the President for "squandering" the surplus, but then demands that Bush spend more on domestic programs.

"It's a sad commentary on the state of the Democratic Party when they meet and cannot unite around a positive agenda and instead can only resort to negative attacks", said Scott McClellan, White House spokesman.

I couldn't have said it better myself.

Anyway, that's...

My two cents...
"JohnHuang2"

[Selara]

What concerns me, is the percentage of American voters who will EVER LEARN about the "errors" or lies, as I call them.

They keep screaming the lies loudly and over longly. We must find a way to make the mainstream press more accountable to the truth.

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

Man, I'd love to "Rochambeau" Clinton for all the crap he spews out about other people.

[weegee]

Good post, can't leave the lies unchallenged. Don't think that we will see a retraction from Sam Donaldson...

They may want to spin the popular vote line but that is only a popularity contest. The Electoral Vote determines the President and George W. Bush got more votes than Junior. What's more, the popular vote was a difference of 0.51% (less than half of one percent of the vote), certainly inside the margin of error.

[weegee]

The opportunity to separate the lies and spin from the facts is in the textbook selection phase in public schools. It must be done as this era of our history is taught to young minds; their parents are already brainwashed and either the recipients of the rewards of the government or overwhelmed with liberal guilt. Teach the children well...

[JohnHuang2]

They may want to spin the popular vote line but that is only a popularity contest. The Electoral Vote determines the President and George W. Bush got more votes than Junior. What's more, the popular vote was a difference of 0.51% (less than half of one percent of the vote), certainly inside the margin of error.

Bears repeating...

[Wondervixen]

What might help is if we expose the members of the media that were onboard that Vegas bound "Booze Bus" McAuliffe bragged about on a New York radio show over his cell phone while quite innebriated. The media on board were treated to debauchery, booze, and wild times in exchange for a cozy spot in McAuliffe's and the DNC's back pockets. All they have to do is keep the DNC cooking coming & lie through their teeth about the GOP.

[Wondervixen]

John, all that needs repeated is that Gore got half a million more votes OVERALL, even though he outdid Bush in the liberal mecca's of New York (by 1.7 mil) and California (by 1.2 mil).

Put in terms Joe Sixpack can understand, this is like the difference between the Rams winning by one point or by 50 points...If they win by 50, they just get the one win they were playing for, not an automatic trip to the Super Bowl.

Gore GOT the electoral votes from NY and California. He's not entitled to more than that. That his final popular vote total was only a half million more than Bush when he got two & three times that in two states just points out how much of a putz the other 48 states thought he was, INCLUDING HIS OWN HOME STATE!

[weegee]

Well put, I hadn't read the election posed that way.

Here is one of the sites that I have used to view the results of 2000:

2000 OFFICIAL PRESIDENTIAL GENERAL ELECTION RESULTS

[nightdriver]

""It's a sad commentary on the state of the Democratic Party when they meet and cannot unite around a positive agenda and instead can only resort to negative attacks", said Scott McClellan, White House spokesman."

However, 43% of the voting public will STILL vote for the democRAT come whatever, or high water.

Being a systemic democRAT like that these days is akin to having a terminal disease.

[lavaroise]

Oh, see McAulife blames this admin on behalf of Dems, yet claims hypocritically this admin cannot blame Bush, and on top of it all claims implicitly Clinton has the right to criticize past admin, because we will have to all think he never did when he actually did.

Leftist hypocrisy: only them can tell you how messy your bedroom is, and don't you even dare to ask about messy Monica's dress in Clinton's bedroom. Feminism and sex harassment suits are only good for others.

[lavaroise]

yet claims hypocritically this admin cannot blame Clinton

[lavaroise]

I finally have the single instruction set that Dems have learned from their Marxist fascists: Power power power, make sure you can deceptively assume powers, powers you claim need to be rejected, hence powerfuly denying others via "democratic" populist fiat these powers while acquiring them yourselves.

IT is no wonder that they all tend to be lunatic and paranoid, who would be when worshiping such evil.

[Republican_Strategist]

[Jimmy Valentine]

Er,...I think you mean Robespierre don't you?

At least if you got Guillotine on your mind.

"A bas les Aristos!"

Regards,

[rkrtgw]

Put in terms Joe Sixpack can understand, this is like the difference between the Rams winning by one point or by 50 points...If they win by 50, they just get the one win they were playing for, not an automatic trip to the Super Bowl.

Not to take away anything from your analogy and with all due respect I must point out the Rams didn't win the Super Bowl. As a long suffering Patriots (and Red Sox) fan I cannot give up my bragging rights to a Super Bowl Championship. Unless of course you are making a prediction for the next Super Bowl.

[lowbridge]

"DNC chief tells whopper..."

Yeah, right. And the world is round. :-)

[Wondervixen]

Rick, I said a TRIP TO the Super Bowl, and yes the Rams have won it, or don't you recall the Tennessee Titans "One yard short" from three years ago?

Jeeeeesh, give a long suffering New Englander a trophy & its like its the only one ever given out...LOL

[RedWing9]

"My two cents...

That was more like a dollar JH!