No prob---though I think this kind of inquiry is misguided. Rather than point the finger at who was "in charge" at some time, it'd be better to analyze and put into context actual policies and economic data.
No prob---though I think this kind of inquiry is misguided. Rather than point the finger at who was "in charge" at some time, it'd be better to analyze and put into context actual policies and economic data.
Actually, Bush was still calling it the Clinton recession in 2002 . . . .
htf are you going to clear 12 trillion in debt in one year?
only if america starts growing its own substance and sellin it out wholesale
But..but...that's too hard! And you just cant find that cogent analysis on blogs!![]()
I don't think that guy ever knows wtf he's talking about.
Technically true.
However, as you know, I don't count RINO's as republicans.
Republican strategy: Do our best to destroy the country and then sit back while the people vote the Democrats into power to try and clean up their mess. Then blame the Democrats for not getting it cleaned up faster, conveniently denying who broke everything in the house in the first place.
And they all gather at the death star where they unhatch their evil conspiracies whilst feasting on newborn babies alongside Satan, Simon Cowell and the ghost of Hitler.
Myopic much?
hahaha no wonder you don't have a real job, and you have a degree, right? sad.
by using the flawed logic you have, any company that spirals downward would never have sound management. a new manager would come, things would be the same while new company policies would be in put to work, then the guy would be put out to dry for not fixing it fast enough.
and if you ever see the guy talk and not just whatever clips glen beck plays for you, he made it pretty clear "it's going to get worse before it gets better".
the guy before always gets the blame in politics if things are going south. dana perino practically said that 9/11 happened during the clinton years just a couple of months ago. so get over it.
Correction.
republican strategy = democrat strategy = say whatever will get you into power, give your team 100% of the credit for anything good, give the other team 100% of the blame for anything bad
Panic giraffe, so my job is not real? You have no idea what you're talking about so just shut the up. You don't know anything about me too. And don't act like you know me so well. Oh yeah, I do have a ing college degree. Do you have one? Do some research and get your facts right before you start judging me, head.
No doubt...what a colossal failure the GOP strategy of further tax-cuts would have been....the Bush tax cuts did little to stimulate private job growth during a economic expansion...
mwahahaha butthurt much?
I will ask you again. Do you have a degree and do you have a real job or do you orgasm by talking about people who you don't know anything about?
Supergirl strategy: Fling vapid reductions against the wall and hope something sticks.
You know that what you said makes absolutely zero sense, right?
When you have an economic expansion, you generally have job growth. How can you differentiate job growth from expansion vs. tax cuts? Linkage would be nice before you just pull something outta your ass and proclaim it gospel.
Some democrats are pushing for Obama to propose further tax cuts to try and save the dems asses. I think he'll do it and when he does I think you will say what great policy it is.
yes to all.
oh, and can i get a price check on "shut the up and get over it already, that was like two ing days ago moron"? thanks, you should be employee of the month.
Last edited by panic giraffe; 01-22-2010 at 12:36 PM.
In 2001, the Bush tax-cuts amounted to a 1.35 trillion redistribution of wealth to the very rich and corporations...When you have an economic expansion, you generally have job growth. How can you differentiate job growth from expansion vs. tax cuts? Linkage would be nice before you just pull something outta your ass and proclaim it gospel.
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archi...commentmessage
More bang for your buck?
Yeah but all they are worried about are the independents buying their load of .
Naturally our government should be determined by what stimulates expenditures the most, or to which we can apply the largest multiplier. Liberty be damned. Great ing argument. Let's just bend over for the Fortune 500 now.
Wouldn't that be a re-re-distribution, ?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)