NationStates Jolt Archive

I will preface this by pointing out that I am a true liberal. I must say that I do feel that Bush is a decent man. However, the men he surrounds himself with and gives enormous amounts of power to are not. Just 4 little letters serve here as proof: PNAC. If you have not heard of it, I suggest you do some serious research. Without question, the war in Iraq WAS planned long before Sept. 11th (plans were cemented before the 2000 elections) not by Bush, but by Cheney, Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld and co. The purpose of said plan was not to free the Iraqis, not to disarm Iraq, not even to take Sadam out of power. In fact, the PNAC specifically said this needed to be done whether or not Sadam's regime was still in power (although the regime's presence would lead an air of legitimacy to the undertaking), but to provide a strategic location for the U.S. military in the Middle East as well as to provide a demonstration of power to the rest of the world as a means to prohibit the rise of any other superpower. Normally, this would be of little concern, as crazy think tanks are a dime a dozen in Washington. However, considering that a large percentage of the current adminstration were members of said crack-pot organization, it certainly seems to me to be reason for regime change.

If this is a true liberal, than I might just be embarassed to say I'm a liberal.

Woo! You should be glad I'm not President than!

And why are you embarrassed, exactly? This is not something I am making up.

Woo! You should be glad I'm not President than!

hear hear!

And why are you embarrassed, exactly? This is not something I am making up.

I understood where you talked about how it was all planned from the start.

However, I think your going too far to say that' we're there to challenge any other future superpowers. Especially considering everyone knew Saddam would fall within weeks.

Read the PNAC document "Rebuilding America's Defenses." They groups admits that it wants to prevent the rise of any other superpower. This is not idle conspiracy theory chatter.

During the Clinton administration,
America experienced it GREATEST period of economic growth EVER.

How did he do it?

Simple.

Remember the term "Trickle down economics?"

It was Reagans baby.....

what you do is this...

Give tax cuts to the rich.
They in turn, are able to iopen more businesses, and hire more people...
and the middle class, and poor.....make more money....

Right?

Wrong....

It doesnt work.


Clinton did the exact opposite.
He gave the tax cuts to the low end....
wich gave them more money to spend back into the economy.
Wich let them create more jobs.....wich hired more workers....wich spent more money back into the economy....

When he left.....he left a HUGE surplus of money....

where did that money go?

Bush gave it away.

Then what did he do?

He started using Trickledown Economy tactics again.....

and we lost jobs...

and the market took a nose dive...'
and we went into a recession....


Bush has to go.

Hes a fool.

I must say I agree with you to an extent. It seems clear to me that supply side economics don't work. However, I think it is unfair to give any president undue credit in economic swings. Clinton was not really the driving force behind the boom, and Bush has not really been the driving force behind the bust. That being said, I still think he needs to go.

Like I need a hole in the head...Ok so the war was being planned, but nobody had the balls to actually take it up(yes i mean the Liberal democrat William Airhead Clinton), who wouldn't know his ass from a hole in the wall!!! Bush is the best thing this country could have had after the crap Clinton put us through for eight years, and will keep us on the path to growth, both at home and overseas.

clinton raised taxes and raised more money than to just cover for the low income tax cuts
people living in the lower end tax bracket really make up a small fraction of the total tax money collected
but i agree with u that reaganomics is really bullshit
it does generate more cashflow into the economy but its not efficient, rich people are more likely to spend money on yachts made in germany than american products
the genisu of clinton's economic policy is ending the deficit, which means that the government doesn't strain the amount of borrowing money from banks which let corporations borrow the money at a much lower interest rate and which lets them expand and create more jobs
the whole economic boom can't be credited to clinton, it was more of the internet and that whole dot-com millionaire trend

and what about bush giving haliburton that VP Cheney just happened to be on the payroll of, an $18 billion no bid contract?

ultimately its up to us to keep spreading the truth and kick those bastards out of the white house

Like I need a hole in the head...Ok so the war was being planned, but nobody had the balls to actually take it up(yes i mean the Liberal democrat William Airhead Clinton), who wouldn't know his ass from a hole in the wall!!! Bush is the best thing this country could have had after the crap Clinton put us through for eight years, and will keep us on the path to growth, both at home and overseas.

crap?
the lowest crime rate since the 70's, the highest homeownership rates, the highest job creation in history (Bush is still 1.5 million in the hole by the way) and general peace...
yeah who would the hell would want that?

Read the PNAC document "Rebuilding America's Defenses." They groups admits that it wants to prevent the rise of any other superpower. This is not idle conspiracy theory chatter.

so you want another USSR? another cold war? are you insane? :roll: what the world does NOT need is another super power. having the US and China around, and what's left of russia is enough.

I must say I agree with you to an extent. It seems clear to me that supply side economics don't work. However, I think it is unfair to give any president undue credit in economic swings. Clinton was not really the driving force behind the boom, and Bush has not really been the driving force behind the bust. That being said, I still think he needs to go.

If he had served only one term..you could say that it was a fluke....but two terms..and the greatest peroid of economic growth?
thats good planning.

Read the PNAC document "Rebuilding America's Defenses." They groups admits that it wants to prevent the rise of any other superpower. This is not idle conspiracy theory chatter.

so you want another USSR? another cold war? are you insane? :roll: what the world does NOT need is another super power. having the US and China around, and what's left of russia is enough.

whoa let's not held up in these passe references of nation-states whoever has the biggest guns owns the world, we live in a new era of globalization where money and resources outweigh everything else
look at gas prices, who really rules the world? the saudis can hurt us as much as they like but they don't because of this new world order where $$$ outweighs everything