I did not post to start a Clinton/Bush war
Posted By: DW on 2007-09-27
In Reply to: Did anyone watch the debate last night? - DW
Obviously there is a fundamental difference between those who support Bush and those who don't. We don't think the same way. Arguing about it gets us no where. I WILL be voting for a Democrat and I wanted some other opinions about the Democratic candidates. I did not want to bash anyone. I feel that all of the candidates are very good in their own ways. I just thought maybe someone would bring up good points that I may not have thought of.
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
The original post was about Bush not Clinton.
Bush is the one who is trying to claim that he has kept the United States safe from terrorist attacks, not Bill Clinton. You are right about one thing. I cannot stand George W. Bush. He he has been an embarrassment to the United States, destroyed our economy, and sullied our reputation throughout the world.
George Bush HIMSELF makes it so easy to make fun of George Bush!!!! oh where would I start, so litt
nm
Another post to start trouble - what a shame -
Clinton/Bush
Again, GT brought the whole subject up about presidential integrity. I just wanted to see GT's feeling about what Clinton did, but of course, GT justified Clinton's lies which was what I fully expected. Again, Bush hasn't been proven to lie. Like I have said several times before on this board I will be the first to cry uncle if Bush is proven to have lied by investigation and that doesn't include accusations and conjecture by liberal politicians, grieving mothers, or leftist bloggers.
Clinton/Bush
Again, GT brought the whole subject up about presidential integrity. I just wanted to see GT's feeling about what Clinton did, but of course, GT justified Clinton's lies which was what I fully expected. Again, Bush hasn't been proven to lie. Like I have said several times before on this board I will be the first to cry uncle if Bush is proven to have lied by investigation and that doesn't include accusations and conjecture by liberal politicians, grieving mothers, or leftist bloggers.
Clinton vs Bush
Clinton gave us 8 years of peace and prosperity DESPITE the opposition of the neocons throughout his administration. Bush failed over and over again DESPITE having party control of both houses. The leadership ability simply speaks for itself. Looking forward to Hill and Bill in charge again. The neocon fanatics have destroyed themselves by their own hand. So be it.
I'm not going to get into the Clinton vs Bush lies because
I don't know if Bush has lied intentionally or not, but it is pretty clear to me that the case made to go to war in Iraq was fabricated. If you ever get a chance watch Dead Wrong on CNN. This is not a politically motivated show just facts.
Is Clinton your only defence for Bush?
x
This is about Katrina/Bush, not Clinton.
nm
Uh oh.......Bill Clinton, not BUSH
xx
You mean 16 years - Both Bush AND Clinton
Disastrous!
Clinton 65% - Bush 28% and falling!
Bill Clinton left office with a 65% approval rating. George W. Bush has an approval rating of 28% and still falling.
Period! 
Interview with Clinton RE: Bush's deficit
Tax cuts are always popular, Clinton said. But about half of these tax cuts since 2001 have gone to people in my income group, the top 1 percent. I've gotten four tax cuts.
Now, what Americans need to understand is that that means every single day of the year, our government goes into the market and borrows money from other countries to finance Iraq, Afghanistan, Katrina and our tax cuts, Clinton added. We depend on Japan, China, the United Kingdom, Saudi Arabia and Korea primarily to basically loan us money every day of the year to cover my tax cut and these conflicts and Katrina. I don't think it makes any sense. I think it's wrong.
Clinton also discussed bringing world leaders together to combat the world's chronic problems — including extreme poverty, global warming and religious conflicts — as well as the Hurricane Katrina recovery effort and Hillary Clinton's political future.
The interview follows:
GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: Mr. President, good to see you again.
FORMER PRESIDENT CLINTON: Thank you, George.
STEPHANOPOULOS: We're here on your initiative, and I want to talk about that, but let's begin with Katrina. President Bush has brought you into the recovery effort, but he's not taking all of your advice. You say roll back the tax cuts for the wealthy. He says no tax increase of any kind. We're spending $5 billion a month in Iraq, probably $200 billion on Katrina. Something's got to give.
CLINTON: Well, that's what I think. I think this idea — I think it's very important that Americans understand, you know, tax cuts are always popular, but about half of these tax cuts since 2001 have gone to people in my income group, the top 1 percent. I've gotten four tax cuts.
They're responsible for this big structural deficit, and they're not going away, the deficits aren't. Now, what Americans need to understand is that that means every single day of the year, our government goes into the market and borrows money from other countries to finance Iraq, Afghanistan, Katrina and our tax cuts. We have never done this before. Never in the history of our republic have we ever financed a conflict, military conflict, by borrowing money from somewhere else.
STEPHANOPOULOS: The president is not going to move. What do Democrats do?
CLINTON: They should continue to oppose it, and they should make it an issue in the 2006 election, and they should make it an issue in the 2008 election. And they should hope, to goodness, for the sake of our country, that the cows don't come home before we have time to rectify it.
I mean, sooner or later, just think what would happen if the Chinese — We're pressing the Chinese now, a country not nearly rich as America per capita, to keep loaning us money with low interest to cover my tax cut, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Katrina and at the same time to raise the value of their currency so their imports into our country will become more expensive, and our exports to them will become less expensive. And by the way, we don't want to let them buy any oil companies or anything like that.
So what if they just got tired of buying our debt? What if the Japanese got tired of doing it? Japan's economy is beginning to grow again. Suppose they decided they wanted to keep some of their money at home and invest it in Japan, because they're starting to grow?
We depend on Japan, China, the United Kingdom, Saudi Arabia and Korea primarily to basically loan us money every day of the year to cover my tax cut and these conflicts and Katrina. I don't think it makes any sense. I think it's wrong.
STEPHANOPOULOS: Is there anything coming out of this initiative here that you can apply directly to Katrina and the poverty we saw revealed there?
CLINTON: Oh, yes, we have raised quite a bit of money for Katrina here. And former President Bush and I, you know, we were asked to raise money. We already have $90 million to $100 million. And what we're trying to do is make sure that our money goes directly to the poorest people who have been dislodged by working with church groups and others. We're working on some mechanisms now to do that, and we'll have some announcements in the next week or so.
But I think there will be a lot of money coming forward from the federal government. A lot of it will be necessary, you know, to build the infrastructure, rebuild the fabric of life and not simply in New Orleans but along the Gulf Coast.
STEPHANOPOULOS: The Gulf Coast.
CLINTON: Yes; you know, keep in mind, Mississippi was devastated. Everything from a mile in Mississippi was blown down, and Alabama, but we've got to do that.
STEPHANOPOULOS: Excuse me; the problems of race that were tied to poverty here, and I know you don't think there's any conscious racism at play in the response, but we saw one more time blacks and whites looked at this event through very different eyes. What can President Bush do about that, and looking back, do you think there was anything more you could have done as president?
CLINTON: Well, I think we did a good job of disaster management.
STEPHANOPOULOS: But the racial divide.
CLINTON: Well, I think we did a good job of that. For example, we had the lowest African-American unemployment, the lowest African-American poverty rate ever recorded. We had the highest homeownership, highest business ownership, and we moved 100 times as many people out of poverty in eight years as had been moved out in the previous 12 years.
This is a matter of public policy, and whether it's race-based or not, if you give your tax cuts to the rich and hope everything works out all right, and poverty goes up, and it disproportionately affects black and brown people, that's a consequence of the action made. That's what they did in the '80s; that's what they've done in this decade.
i was actually trying to remember if this happened with Clinton and Bush...
Did Bush give speeches before he became president? I of course cannot remember last month let alone eight years ago.... After the election I noticed how often I saw him speaking out and i thoght it was a little weird since he's not president yet. I understand he is getting a head start and saying what he is going to do etc. etc. but i still find it a bit odd. but again, i can't remember if this is "normal" for the president elect to come in and kind of take over before the actual inauguration date...
you got Bush mixed up with Bill Clinton...it was....(sm)
all Clinton's cronies who ended up on Wall Street, FM/FM, etc., in charge, who were still there when everything tanked.....Clinton's cronies have profited, not Bush's
And Bush inherited a lot of crap from Clinton
And Clinton inherited a lot from Bush Sr., etc, etc.
It's like the Sunny & Cher song....and the beat goes on.
What a president does while in office will determine if they become a good president or not. Right now Obama is not off to a good start. As his slogan goes one can only "hope" that it will get better.
Bush Sr and Clinton to Share Liberty Medal
Former Presidents Bush, Clinton to Share Liberty Medal
Friday, June 30, 2006
PHILADELPHIA — Former presidents George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton, who put politics aside to help raise more than $1 billion for disaster relief efforts, will share the 2006 Liberty Medal, officials said Thursday.
The award annually honors an individual or organization that has demonstrated leadership and vision in the pursuit of liberty of conscience or freedom from oppression, ignorance, or deprivation.
Bush, a Republican, and Clinton, a Democrat, joined forces last year to aid Gulf Coast victims of Hurricane Katrina through the Bush-Clinton Katrina Fund. Earlier, they formed the Bush-Clinton Tsunami Partnership to help survivors of the December 2004 tsunami that killed more than 200,000 people in southeast Asia.
The former leaders will accept the medal and its accompanying $100,000 prize on Oct. 5 at the National Constitution Center, in what will be the first Liberty Medal given under the center's management.
First awarded in 1989, the Liberty Medal was previously administered by regional civic groups including the Philadelphia Foundation and Greater Philadelphia First.
Click here for the Natural Disaster Content Center
Past Liberty Medal recipients include Polish union leader Lech Walesa, former President Jimmy Carter, former Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall, South African leaders F.W. de Klerk and Nelson Mandela, former Secretary of State Colin Powell and, most recently, Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko.
Six recipients of the medal have subsequently won the Nobel Peace Prize
If it Clinton screwed something up - why didn't Bush fix it? He had 8 years!
As much as you want to blame Bill Clinton......don't forget who held the reins for the last 8 years......who let them run amuck? Why was nothing done?
Check out the mortgage failures.
Tell me which failed more, prime or subprime
Tell me what is the rate of failures under the CRA or even Bush's ADDI (which i attack alll the time)
Once again, REALITY AND THE DATA doesn't fit ya'lls claims.
Basically what happened was.. we reformed bankruptcy laws.. so that people who ran into dire straights could not restructure.
We packaged the loans into commodity derivatives. These are sorta mirror bets on the loans. Sorta..as the same loan will be sold many times in many derivative packages.. that's why the housing derivatives are worth more than all the real estate in the US. Derivatives are actually not that bad.. when a market is stable and only has to deal with natural forces. The housing market was bubbled.. partially due to low interest rates that encouraged everyone to buy, even the rich, and partially due to the CRA and the ADDI.. which did add customers to the market (helping form the bubble was the extent the CRA and the ADDI had in this mess)
All it took was a few failures to pop the bubble..and make real estate prices drop,. and mind you, it was mainly prime loans (READ not loans given to poor people and not loans under the CRA) that failed. The derivative market.,.which like I said, is really mirrors of the same loans.. cause the defaults to explode with ten times the ferocity, because one loan could effect the price of dozens of derivatives.
Really the poor and even irresponsible people .. simply did not have the economic ability to cause this mess. Pool all their money together and waste it on hookers.. it would have zero effect without help from the rich elites and their magnifying packaged derivatives.
THE CRA and ADDI both had stricter requirements than loans you got from normal banks.. both required income data.. where many prime loans did not.. they also greatly limited you on how much home you could purchase..whereas private banks did not care if you tried to buy something you could not afford.
Don't believe me?.. Look in the phone book.. call your own housing authority - you can get a loan for 106% the purchase price of a home even today.. if you're poor enough.
Ask to hear the red tape and hoops you must go through.. Heck, it is probably easier to just get a real job and earn real money than go through the FHA.
I'd say Bush paid closer attention than did the Clinton administration!
Bin Laden was on the radar during the Clinton administration and yet the potential threat he posed was virtually ignored!
here's its all Bill Clinton's fault post
like clockwork.
Stop bringing up Bush - this post was not about Bush
I even said we have had some good presidents and some bad ones, but this post was not about Bush. It was about Obama. Yes Bush was one of the worst presidents I'm not arguing with you on that one, but everytime anyone brings up something about our current president they are shot back with Bush this or Bush that and on things that have nothing to do with what the current topic is about. Again, this was not about Bush. It was about Obama.
Bush inherited Powell from Clinton who inherited him from Reagan.
Bush wouldn't have had the sense to pick Powell all by himself. Have you heard the latest on Condi? She's been palling around with senior Hamas leaders, sending them thank you notes and such.
Here's how that other thing works. When the fringers stop lying, dems stop denying. It's not that complicated.
This post was not an attack against Bush...sm
Even though WE were the slow on the draw, and I think the pres needs to work on that.
Your response was not so typical (well maybe) because I don't see where Bush is getting bashed here, but if you feel you must bring that up he should be working on a Crisis Intervention Task Force - a group who can think fast and make sound, quick decisions in times of crisis involving American Citizens.
Quite frankly, the media is being VERY unfair to the people who were trapped in Lebanon calling them whiners, ingrates, etc. When they speak they are not singling out people who complained (which I don't care if they complained, and why should you?), they speak as if the whole group was ingrateful, complained, and deserved to stay in the middle of a war zone.
Why don't watch the clip in the link above? You might get a different perspective yourself.
Oh, and it's cool, the Bush is Jesus post on the C board. SM
Yeah, typical libs.
I have no clue why you added this Bush rant to my post...
George Bush did not single-handedly send troops to war. There is that little ol thing called Congress who have to vote to allow him to go to war, he can't just do it on his own. And guess what...they DID. Democrats and Republicans alike. I just don't understand why some Americans don't understand THAT. Blame it on George Bush, like he was King or something. He did not do it alone. And you are right, I will NEVER accept that ANY soldier died for no reason. How arrogant of anyone to even suggest such a thing. Our men and women in uniform go where they are sent and they do their duty. Shame on ANY American who would publically say those brave young men and women died in vain, I don't care what their politics are. To me, that reeks.
I also do not know why it is so easy for some Americans to totally ignore the many reasons we went into Iraq. Have you ever actually read the Iraq resolution passed by Congress? I seriously doubt it. Hussein was in violation of so many UN resolutions it would take a ream of paper to list them. And he did finance and harbor terrorists. One of the perps of the Achille Lauro hijacking lived out his miserable life there being given free medical care and a free ride by the Hussein government. Zarqawi had his little terrorist training camp up in Northern Iraq for a year before we went in. One of Hussein's higher ups met with Mohammed Atta a couple of months before 9-11. What do you think they were talking about? The weather?
I don't believe I even mentioned the President in my post. I believe we went into Iraq for a good reason, we had been hit and we had to hit back harder. We did so in Iraq and Afghanistan. We have not had another major attack since that happened. Wonder why that is...????
My point is, the President is not singly responsible for the war in Iraq. The Congress is just as responsible. So when you start to lay blame and malign the names of good men and women who died for something they believed in, even if you don't....you should spread the blame evenly. Get off the Hate Bush train and back into reality.
Funny it's okay to post inflammatory reports about Bush (nm)
x
Refer to the post below where Bush has pretty much doubled the money
y
didnt say bush appointed him. said paulson did. besides that post wasnt for you n e way.
s
I wish he would start! nm
Yes, why don't we start with them?
You are definitely the chosen people: Chosen to be banned from heaven. This is what the people who pretend to support you really believe. And it must be true, because according to them, you and I will be spending eternity together, and no doubt that will be hell for us both.
Jerry Falwell: Jews and Muslims Can't Go to Heaven
Jerry Falwell gets further and further out there. His latest knucklehead theory is that Jews and Muslims can't go to heaven.
While I am a strong supporter of the State of Israel and dearly love the Jewish people and believe them to be the chosen people of God, I continue to stand on the foundational biblical principle that all people -- Baptists, Methodists, Pentecostals, Jews, Muslims, etc. -- must believe in the Lord Jesus Christ in order to enter heaven. -Jerry Falwell
March 14, 2006
Wow...where to start....
Yes, I do agree about those entering our country to a point. I believe that they need to have respect for our laws or not be here. Yes, we are a government of the people BY the people. There is no clause that says "unless we don't find that convenient right now."
Respect for those in office...not so much unless it is earned. Respect for their office itself, yes.
Now, I'm not so sure about the rest of your post or where that came from about me believing I have a final word on everything and my way is the only way and that I am a one person catalyst to change. That was really out there, especially for the very little I have posted. I don't care for the daily Kos. I have never said where I get my news. I do not believe everything everyone tells me...actually very little that anyone tells me. My research is very accurate, however. Though I have never posted any of it on this board and have never needed to as I tend to stay out of these little spats because of the level to which they quickly degenerate. I don't mix emotion with politics. That's the wrong road for me and it is my belief that it's a big problem with politics today. People take hot button emotional issues and try to legislate with them and politicize them. BS as far as I'm concerned, and I don't really care what anyone else's opinion is of that.
So! If you want me to answer to all that, you'll have to actually explain what planet or universe it's coming from first because I am at a loss.
Why don't you start? How much do YOU think?
0%, 10%, 20%? Flat tax? Only some types of income? No taxes at all, and we pay as we go for everything, like school, toll roads, police, fire, federal sales tax?
here's a start
Eliminating Wasteful Spending
Stop Earmarks, Pork-Barrel Spending, And Waste: John McCain will veto every pork-laden spending bill and make their authors famous. As President, he will seek the line-item veto to reduce waste and eliminate earmarks that have led to corruption. Earmarks restrict America's ability to address genuine national priorities and interfere with fair, competitive markets.
Leadership, Courage And Choices: Reducing spending means making choices. John McCain will provide the courageous leadership necessary to control spending, including:
Eliminate broken government programs. The federal government itself admits that one in five programs do not perform.
Reform our civil service system to promote accountability and good performance in our federal workforce.
Reform procurement programs and cut wasteful spending in defense and non-defense programs.
Gee....where to start??....
I would close the borders. Nobody in unless comes through the LEGAL channels.
Then I would get rid of Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Jack Murtha, and others who ride their coat tails.
And then I would give myself the power of line item veto.
I could probably list more, but you only wanted 3. LOL.
i should start using a name on here
i was the one who asked about the father's rights and i agreed to your comment.
It may be a start.......... sm
but like I said, I think energy costs and environmental conservation will be the last thing on folks minds in a few short years.
Then I would start with....
taking away the right for christians to assemble. What you guys don't seem to realize is that when you start taking away rights, it sets a precedence for others to follow.
LOL....that's a start...(sm)
I would mess with you about the foot channel, but since you took the time to agree with me, I'll let it go this time.
MEOW
But why start
at the bottom? Why not set an example and tell congress, sorry you are NOT getting your raise?
I think we should all start asking
to speak to an American when we get phone calls or call a place and get an ESL on the line. Maybe if we refuse to speak to them....they might realize they need to hire some Americans.
Are we really going to start this again?
Let it go, already.
Me too! They always start my day off
And we keep some of her posts behind the desk in the Emergency Room, too. They've proven to be reliable emetics in poisoning cases.
I don't know where to start...
Lead him down the right path? and you do that by calling people dysfunctional, disgusting, etc, and all the other things I have seen you post. Patty, I won't argue this with you as I am afraid I may say something pretty unChristian. I am out of here.
That's start of the war in *2003* nm
Again, what if? That was my question to start with.
I'm not accusing anyone, I merely asked *what if*? I can't say with complete certainty that this happened anymore than you can say with complete certainty that it didn't. Minority status is fine with me, given the evidence and pervasive secrecy and lying of this administration. Have a nice day.
Very good start...sm
Thanks for the info LVMT.
What I wanted to know to start with...
is how can I know that Democrats/liberals/the left, WHOEVER, will keep this country safe, when half of them deny there is a threat and the other half have no idea how to deal with it? What I said it was not political, I meant it. Both sides should be trying to protect this country, but frankly I only see one who seems to understand the threat. As I have said numerous times, I am not a registered Repbulican. I am not thrilled with any party in this country right now, but I have to register as SOMETHING to vote, so I am registered independent. Yes, I am conservative, I have conservative moral values and I believe if we had stuck closer to moral values we would have a lot fewer issues these days, but I digress. My concern is, Dem, that I don't think your party and many of its members grasp what a real threat radical Muslims are, and if you don't perceive the threat you don't take steps to fight it, and that is the reason I referred to Clinton, because in all honesty I do not think he perceived the threat. I do not want to think that he did and ignored it. And my point is, I don't think your party to this day perceives the enormity of the threat, and yes, that scares me. This is not rhetoric. This is the way I, me, personally, feel and has nothing to do with left or right Dems or Republicans, other than the Republicans do seem to have a better grasp on the threat than the Dems do. What I would like to see is America united against the threat, with politics out of it. That is what I would REALLY like to see.
Here's why SP need to start vetting
OK. I'll take a crack at breaking this down for you. While SP was building her candidate resume back at the hut in Wasilla, her predecessor in the governor's office teed her off after he SELECTED her (not an elected position) as Chairman of the Ethics Committee. When she started whistle-blowing on those entrenched Juneau cronies, he tended not to take her housekeeping recommendations to heart. Being such a strong and powerful woman, she launched a campaign of her own to take his seat away from him based on her ethics platform. Once in that chair, she spent a great deal of time and taxpayer's money scrapping more than 300 of his development plans in the name of fiscal responsibility and kicked out 30-some-odd of his other appointees, being the woman scorned and all.
FF back to the future. Once JM has ridden to victory on her coattails and puts her back in that token female corner where she belongs, McWayne proceeds to run the same style of corrupt, unethical administration of his mentor, the W. She takes the backseat VP position and waits for him to become incapacitated and gets bored waiting around to cast a tie-breaking vote in the senate. She falls back on the only experience she has…ethics butt-kicking.
She's not afraid to bulldoze her own party members, as her record so clearly indicates, so kick butt she does. If she can't successfully take aim at her boss man, like she did before, maybe JM will simply expire and thrust her up into the Prez chair. Failing that, riding on the crest of the hypnotic spell she has cast over the pub party and taking advantage of the leftover collective amnesia the nation finds itself suspended in the aftermath of the 2008 pub campaign, she mounts a successful pub candidacy for Prez, in which case she will need to choose a running mate. Got the picture?
Oh, REALLY? Like you guys don't start to -sm
soil your panties everytime you come across another person who doesn't think exactly like you in every way?
I know -- but everytime you start to
feel a scintilla of sympathy for them, they lunge at ya with the retracted lips and missing, yellowed teeth.
Not to start a race war
People can raise this question over and over again but what I would like to know is this: Has anyone ever raised the same questions regarding white candidates in this and/or past elections and why people voted for them? Of course not...I wouldn't care if Obama were multicolored - people are going to vote for whomever they choose and I for one am weary of the constant references to race...
|
