Why We Need Clinton Back

  • Thread starter epic
  • 87 comments
  • 2,145 views
epic

epic

2,223
United States
Miami
Who else would say something like this?

"When I was a younger man and had a life, I owned an El Camino pickup in the '70s. It was a real sort of Southern deal. I had Astroturf in the back. You don't want to know why, but I did." --Bill Clinton :lol: Please everyone vote him for president
 
Under Clinton we had peace, prosperity, and the largest budget surplus in history. Then Bush was elected. Now we have an impending war, the stock market is in shambles, and we are projecting a deficit. That's why I want Clinton back. :rolleyes:
 
Well, I think the seeds of the stockmarket collapse were well and truly sown in 1998 and 1999, but your point on the deficit is valid - if the US economy doesn't pick up in the next 18 months (although I think it probably will once the Iraq situation's been finalised) that deficit could make things very hard.
 
Originally posted by TAFJonathan
Under Clinton we had peace, prosperity, and the largest budget surplus in history. Then Bush was elected. Now we have an impending war, the stock market is in shambles, and we are projecting a deficit. That's why I want Clinton back. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
You're blindly liberal and I hope you never run for political office until you've grown up.
 
Originally posted by vat_man
Well, I think the seeds of the stockmarket collapse were well and truly sown in 1998 and 1999, but your point on the deficit is valid - if the US economy doesn't pick up in the next 18 months (although I think it probably will once the Iraq situation's been finalised) that deficit could make things very hard.
Click to expand...

No-one, including me, is willing to put any more money into the markets until the situation on Iraq has indeed been finalised - hence the source of the inconsistency (not that the Bush administration hasn't been spewing out inconsistency since the beginning). I find it extremely hard to even listen to liberals blame the Bush administration for the fledgling economy and for not letting the inspectors do their jobs - if we let the inspectors work longer, the stock market will stay out longer.
 
Clinton may have been the "coolest" president, but Clinton had a chance and did not take it, to take out Osama. Clinton also let the military go to hell in a hand basket by closing military bases across the country.
 
Originally posted by Viper Zero
Clinton may have been the "coolest" president, but Clinton had a chance and did not take it, to take out Osama. Clinton also let the military go to hell in a hand basket by closing military bases across the country.
Click to expand...

When did this chance of Clinton's to take out bin Laden occur? Hasn't President Bush had the same chance? Better yet, didn't every president since bin Laden was born have that chance?! :rolleyes: Don't blame one man when it's not one man's fault.
 
Originally posted by M5Power
No-one, including me, is willing to put any more money into the markets until the situation on Iraq has indeed been finalised - hence the source of the inconsistency (not that the Bush administration hasn't been spewing out inconsistency since the beginning).
Click to expand...

Well, this goes back to the tech wreck of early 2000 - the market has basically been cactus since then. That little run was let go for far too long under Clinton's administration, and Alan Greenspan has to wear a lot of the blame there for misreading the low inflation - the reason inflation was low was that all the excess cash was being absorbed by the stock market, so there was no rise in commodity prices - they should put rates up a lot earlier than they did, but I'd hate to think how much pressure the Democrats put on the Fed not to raise rates in the run up to a Presidential election.

Also - trying to revive the stock market is NOT a valid reason to attack Iraq. I heard some suggestion that Powell is going to present some interecepted Iraqi transmissions at the UN later this week, so that might be interesting.
 
Originally posted by TAFJonathan
Under Clinton we had peace, prosperity, and the largest budget surplus in history. Then Bush was elected. Now we have an impending war, the stock market is in shambles, and we are projecting a deficit. That's why I want Clinton back. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

This is ridiculous. Do you really think Bush is responsible for all of this?

And what's so great about a surplus, anyway? You like the government taking more money than they need?

Every post I read of yours is progressively more mislead. Is there lead in your house?
 
Originally posted by milefile
And what's so great about a surplus, anyway? You like the government taking more money than they need?
Click to expand...

The ol' surplus is an interesting one - from a self interest point of view, if the government runs a deficit, they have to borrow money. If they borrow money, it (if done for a while) can lead to an increase in interest rates as the more the public sector borrows, the less there is for the private sector.

In times when the economy needs a little kick along, the government can run a deficit to try and stimulate activity through spending, which I'm guessing is what Bush is trying to do - particularly since US interest rates are very close to zero at the moment. I'm just a bit concerned about the size of the deficit. If things come good quickly once hostilities in Iraq are completed, the large deficit may cause interest rates to go up much more quickly that they would have with a smaller deficit, or small surplus.
 
'Misplaced Sarcasm'.

I hearby present the 'Oxymoron of the Week' trophy.

Sarcasm is never misplaced. Annoying and inflammatory, maybe, but never misplaced.
 
Originally posted by M5Power
You're blindly liberal and I hope you never run for political office until you've grown up.

Do you believe 'misplaced sarcasm' will help you sound intelligent?
Click to expand...

This is where my initial hostility to you came from. You think you have the right to say someone is a liberal by reading just one sentence. This would irritate most people. Being called blind just makes it more irritating. Like I am some pot smoking tree hugging student hippy liberal.

The second quote is an insult to a persons intelligence. The same as taking the fact that I dont use capital letters to mean that I am slow or stupid.

I now know you are a good guy, but insulting people like that can cause people to get angry and shouldnt happen.

Yes, I used capital letters this time because I'm putting a little thought into what I am saying. Unlike how my posts are usually. :)
 
Originally posted by advanR
This is where my initial hostility to you came from. You think you have the right to say someone is a liberal by reading just one sentence. This would irritate most people. Being called blind just makes it more irritating. Like I am some pot smoking tree hugging student hippy liberal.
Click to expand...

Nah - I've read much more of what he's written than that.

The second quote is an insult to a persons intelligence. The same as taking the fact that I dont use capital letters to mean that I am slow or stupid.
Click to expand...

Using proper English is a sign of intelligence, for one, and there's no way that can be denied. Additionally, when people have a blind association to a group or political party (i.e. naming one side of an issue so as to block out the other side of the issue), they make statements such as 'we had the largest budget surplus in history.' (Well of course we did! We spent and received exponentially more based on inflation than any other president in history!) But the biggest possible problem is when they attain political office, for two reasons -

a) They cause huge arguments between people who are the same way on the opposite side of the spectrum (i.e. they can't see the other side's philosophy because their head's buried in the sand).
b) They make what they think are educated decisions on a topic without hearing the opposite side of the issue. Fortunately, Jonathan shows a wonderful example of this when he says that under Clinton we had 'peace and prosperity.' Peace as in an extremely large war in Kosovo, and prosperity as in having oral sex with an intern?

Clinton was not the president to end all presidents, and President Bush is not a bad guy (especially not for the reasons named by Jonathan) - but Jonathan might lead you elsewhere with logic that only examines one side of an issue. I've said it before and I'll say it again - when you examine just one side of an issue, of course it's going to seem correct.

insulting people like that can cause people to get angry and shouldnt happen.
Click to expand...


If Jonathan gets angry, then he'll hopefully stand up for himself and pour in to this discussion more information on why he feels the way he does (and not just praise and slander for men based on their political party). Additionally, he'll get angry and devote more attention to the topic.
 
I never blocked the opinions of people that disagreed with me. on a subject I take one side, someone else takes the other side. I try and acknowledge the othersides points though, because otherwise I delude myself from reality.

I have always used proper english(tried to), and dont deny that if a person doesnt, it shows a bit of their intelligence. But dont tell me I am unintelligent because I dont hit shift. sometimes i dont feel like it. It must have been easier for you to do that before because you were disagreeing with me on something (i dont know what, but okay.....).

Please dont say capitalizing letters is proper english. Im sure you will, but I think proper english is using words where they should go, and spelling them properly. kindah lyk this aint not a saintance mistir.

the urge to respond to someones post should come from reading something you see a flaw in. You then point out that flaw, or point out something else. It shouldnt come from a person being insulted. That leads to more flaming and a ruined thread. By insulting someone you in some way start the flame war. If he cant handle the words you send his way and he gets really angry and types up a lot of ****, its your fault for starting it, not his for not staying cool and responding orderly.

maybe you saw some of his posts before, and maybe he is everything you said he was. But I dont believe you had read any of my posts before when you said those things to me.

I am not obsessed with this ****, BTW. Im just responding to your post. Im not sitting here in tears because you called me stupid (or something like that).
 
Originally posted by advanR

Please dont say capitalizing letters is proper english. Im sure you will, but I think proper english is using words where they should go, and spelling them properly. kindah lyk this aint not a saintance mistir.
Click to expand...
Wha? So now we just invent correct grammar based on what we feel like doing? Whatever.



I am not obsessed with this ****, BTW. Im just responding to your post. Im not sitting here in tears because you called me stupid (or something like that).
Click to expand...
Oh good because it sounded like you were.
 
Originally posted by M5Power
If Jonathan gets angry, then he'll hopefully stand up for himself and pour in to this discussion more information on why he feels the way he does (and not just praise and slander for men based on their political party). Additionally, he'll get angry and devote more attention to the topic.
Click to expand...

Provoking someone with insults isn't a good way to inspire constructive debate. Go ahead, insult me over this one. I'm sure you can find some obscure grammatical error, or if not, just call me a blind, bleeding-heart liberal.

Did it ever occur to you that perhaps a liberal point of view and the values of the Democratic Party appeal to me because they are on a line with my social, moral, economic, and overall political philosophy?
 
Originally posted by TAFJonathan
Provoking someone with insults isn't a good way to inspire constructive debate. Go ahead, insult me over this one. I'm sure you can find some obscure grammatical error, or if not, just call me a blind, bleeding-heart liberal.
Click to expand...
How about "hypersensitive"?
 

Similar threads

Oner
How about a Pic and a Story? Preface: Feeling Grateful, Hopeful, Loved & Motivated
Replies
0
Views
359
Oner
Oner
GranTurNismo
The Future of Joe Biden
2
Replies
38
Views
2K
Imari
Imari
Suzumiya
The New Blood - A story based off of a GT4 Spec-II playthrough.
Replies
3
Views
2K
Suzumiya
Suzumiya
J
Manual Vs Automatic, why not equal
2
Replies
34
Views
10K
Tornado
Tornado
VBR
MSNBC Producer Quits - “We are a cancer..."
Replies
10
Views
1K
ryzno
ryzno

Latest Posts

Back