Originally posted by Thomas Crowne
And, thank you, skadi, for a post that contains nothing but words strung together to form no meaningful post. You post your drivel in the same way Colonel does, in a manner that infers the democrats can do better, but anyone who actually pays attention knows that the dems (I should say the liberals as they have hijacked the dem party) have done more to gut the country of what made it strong.

Quick lesson, BTW, it isn't the Christians that will bring on WWIII; that statement is totally illogical when compared with the Christian message. As a matter of fact, I doubt the christians will be here when that goes down.

I expect posts of substance from you Skad-meister, please don't sink to a lower level we've come to expect from the Evil Elf!

WAAAHHH! You're on the mean Colonel's team. Stop calling us all those bad names. WAHHHH! I'm gonna tell!

TC, its obvious to anyone that "thinks" that this country is going down the tubes with the quickness. And, yes, it happened on Bush's watch and yes, Bush is to blame. I mean, how the hell do you lose 3 MILLION jobs in JUST 2 1/2 years?? That's a amazing. What lame excuse are you going to use?

What? It's Clinton's fault? I think that lie is getting a bit old since he added about 20 million in his term.

How do you turn a trillion dollar surplus to a hundred dollar billion deficit and climbing?

I forgot. That's Clinton's fault too.

How do you turn world adoration for America into unbridled hate for America. Oh, wait, I got the memo: It's Clinton's fault.

TC, if you really care about this country, you need to stop and really think about this country's current precarious circumstances and stop saying"liberal this" and "Democrat that."

I say Bush is to blame because he is the president and the buck stops with him. To deny or defend him is to be either a blind loyalist or just rock stupid.

Stop calling a spade a spade, you tell me? Do you have the market cornered on that right, ol' boy?

Not a very interesting regurgitation of the usual liberal spin on the golden things Clinton did and blaming Bush for the things that were set in motion before his presidency. I'm sure if the roles were reversed, your attitude would greatly differ with the one you now exhibit, and the drivel is so old and stale it is ruining my lunch, Esquire.
BTW, I doubt Skadi is a member of your Army as Skadi does not typically display your normal MO. Fortunately, you do not even have a fireteam, much less an army!

Originally posted by Thomas Crowne
Stop calling a spade a spade, you tell me? Do you have the market cornered on that right, ol' boy?

Not a very interesting regurgitation of the usual liberal spin on the golden things Clinton did and blaming Bush for the things that were set in motion before his presidency. I'm sure if the roles were reversed, your attitude would greatly differ with the one you now exhibit, and the drivel is so old and stale it is ruining my lunch, Esquire.
BTW, I doubt Skadi is a member of your Army as Skadi does not typically display your normal MO. Fortunately, you do not even have a fireteam, much less an army!

Ok, which is it? Blind loyalty or just rock stupid?

Clinton DID inherit a defict. Clinton DID inherit massive unemployment. Do you remember that? That was after 12 years of republican rule form Reagan to Bush. You can't have it both ways. You can't blame Clinton for the current malaise this country's in under republican leadership and then credit Bush 1 and Reagan for the prosperity under Clinton when under Bush 1 everything was in the sh1thole just like now.

Commonsense says it doesn't work but then again, that's a foreign concept to the repugnants, right?

Liberal LAWYERS & the ACLU, are to blame for the American Economy.
Because of Lawsuits from liberals crying WAAAAAAA!!!!!
The ACLU foots the bill for these crybaby minorities, so more money must now be spent by corporations, hospitals, doctors etc. to cover lawsuits and court cost.
Clinton was a lawyer - enough said!

Originally posted by Thomas Crowne
Stop calling a spade a spade, you tell me? Do you have the market cornered on that right, ol' boy?

Not a very interesting regurgitation of the usual liberal spin on the golden things Clinton did and blaming Bush for the things that were set in motion before his presidency. I'm sure if the roles were reversed, your attitude would greatly differ with the one you now exhibit, and the drivel is so old and stale it is ruining my lunch, Esquire.
BTW, I doubt Skadi is a member of your Army as Skadi does not typically display your normal MO. Fortunately, you do not even have a fireteam, much less an army!

tom, i have one thing to say. YOU ARE A #ING GENIUS!

Originally posted by Colonel

Originally posted by Thomas Crowne
Stop calling a spade a spade, you tell me? Do you have the market cornered on that right, ol' boy?

Not a very interesting regurgitation of the usual liberal spin on the golden things Clinton did and blaming Bush for the things that were set in motion before his presidency. I'm sure if the roles were reversed, your attitude would greatly differ with the one you now exhibit, and the drivel is so old and stale it is ruining my lunch, Esquire.
BTW, I doubt Skadi is a member of your Army as Skadi does not typically display your normal MO. Fortunately, you do not even have a fireteam, much less an army!

Ok, which is it? Blind loyalty or just rock stupid?

Clinton DID inherit a defict. Clinton DID inherit massive unemployment. Do you remember that? That was after 12 years of republican rule form Reagan to Bush. You can't have it both ways. You can't blame Clinton for the current malaise this country's in under republican leadership and then credit Bush 1 and Reagan for the prosperity under Clinton when under Bush 1 everything was in the sh1thole just like now.

Commonsense says it doesn't work but then again, that's a foreign concept to the repugnants, right?

I'd rather be rock-stupid (which defines the Colonel) rather than suffering from blind loyalty (oh, that defines the Colonel as well!)

Now, on to the issues:

First off, Clinton did not inheirt a 'massive" unemployment rate from Bush, and that which he did inherit, along with the sluggish economy, could have been resolved with a modest cut in interest rates. Bush '41 will go to his grave believing that Greenspan did that on purpose to unseat Bush. I'll not weigh in on that, that is between those two.
What is not in doubt is what Shrub inherted from the eight years from Klinton, and anyone with no political blinders on knows that the numbers were played with by Klinton up until the very end, and Bush '43 inherited a mess from the 42nd president. Reagan drove use into a deficit plowing under the Soviets, Klinton cannot claim that or any other victory, unless you count a few sexual scores while in the White House.

How many times does one hear that a president has nothing to do with that country's economy?

That's crap. Yes, Clinton deserves plenty of credit for the economy performing the way it did under his watch.

The budget and reconciliation act of 1993 which passed each branch of the legislature without one Republican vote and by one vote in each branch of Congress had one ingredient in it that one cannot ignore. This is just one example.

Business owners were given a virtual writeoff on any new equipment purchased during the time period. I am in the building material business(a wholesaler) and I continued to see lumber dealers pull up in brand new trucks. I asked a couple of owners about this. They were buying the new trucks because they were a complete tax write off. One a died in the wool conservative credited Clinton.

What does this one thing do? Easy-people have to build the trucks, sell the trucks, maintain the trucks, account receivable the trucks, etc. etc., etc. Yes, the president does have much to do with how an economy performs. Don't let anyone tell you different. If they do they are covering up for the inadequacies of the one in office.