George Bush

Paradise Theater

Moderator: Andrew

Postby hoagiepete » Thu Nov 06, 2008 8:31 am

elmotano wrote:
hoagiepete wrote:
elmotano wrote:
hoagiepete wrote:
Hollywood wrote:
yogi wrote:Stupid Me I thought Bill Clinton was The President that ushered in NAFTA???????????????


He had no choice but to sign it. The House and Senate had the majority to send it back if he used his veto. This was George HW Bush and congress' law. Bill Clinton softly voiced his opposition. Many people forget that Clinton's first year was rough.

Blaming Clinton for NAFTA is as bad as giving Reagan credit for freeing the Iranian hostages. The Carter administration had worked the whole thing out and Reagan takes office and claims credit.

Bush has done a lot wrong and unfortunately it will overshadow the positive thing he may have done. The worst president ever is a HUGE stretch. 9/11 was devastating to him, as it would have been to Gore. Iraq compounded this and his poor economic policies.


I guess it all comes around eventually. Clinton then took credit for the economy created by Reaganomics.


Actually, Clinton saved us from Reaganomics.....aka trickle down economics. This worked well for the first 4 years of Reagan's time. But then rich people's sphincters got super tight and the cash stopped trickling. It took 2 years of Clinton policies to straighten the ship.


I don't agree. Better look back. The effects didn't fully kick in until the end of Reagan's term and through Clinton's. Enlighten me what Clinton did to right the ship.


Don't need to look back, I lived through it. Actually voted for Reagan his first time around. Voted against him the second time around, trickle down economics was already starting to bring us down.
Clinton's policies took about 2 years to take affect, actually by the second year the economy started turning back around.
It usually takes a president's policies 2 years to take effect. Oh wait, are you trying to tell us that Clinton caused this mess we're in? Sorry, that is laughable.


Again...what did Clinton do to right the ship? Never acused Clinton of this mess, entirely. I'd blame Congress, Clinton, GW, and Wall Street for the banking mess. Unions and mismanagement for manufacturing hits. Some of this is temporary while the global market is established. Buying power has to be developed globally, which means those countries need to be developed (meaning jobs). Decades of congresses and presidents for the middle eastern/oil mess (should have done something long ago to become less reliant on OPEC).

Plenty of blame to go around for everyone...and unfortunately, no one is ever a person enough to actually accept the blame. It is ALWAYS someone else's fault. D's have had an easy target with GW. I hope things turn around for all of our sakes, but I hope that it won't take us succombing to socialism or give up our position as a global leader/power to do so. There is a lot to be said about feeling secure (safe) as I tuck my kids in bed at night.
hoagiepete
Cassette Tape
 
Posts: 1610
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2006 10:16 am

Postby Toph » Thu Nov 06, 2008 12:25 pm

elmotano wrote:
hoagiepete wrote:
elmotano wrote:
hoagiepete wrote:
Hollywood wrote:
yogi wrote:Stupid Me I thought Bill Clinton was The President that ushered in NAFTA???????????????


He had no choice but to sign it. The House and Senate had the majority to send it back if he used his veto. This was George HW Bush and congress' law. Bill Clinton softly voiced his opposition. Many people forget that Clinton's first year was rough.

Blaming Clinton for NAFTA is as bad as giving Reagan credit for freeing the Iranian hostages. The Carter administration had worked the whole thing out and Reagan takes office and claims credit.

Bush has done a lot wrong and unfortunately it will overshadow the positive thing he may have done. The worst president ever is a HUGE stretch. 9/11 was devastating to him, as it would have been to Gore. Iraq compounded this and his poor economic policies.


I guess it all comes around eventually. Clinton then took credit for the economy created by Reaganomics.


Actually, Clinton saved us from Reaganomics.....aka trickle down economics. This worked well for the first 4 years of Reagan's time. But then rich people's sphincters got super tight and the cash stopped trickling. It took 2 years of Clinton policies to straighten the ship.


I don't agree. Better look back. The effects didn't fully kick in until the end of Reagan's term and through Clinton's. Enlighten me what Clinton did to right the ship.


Don't need to look back, I lived through it. Actually voted for Reagan his first time around. Voted against him the second time around, trickle down economics was already starting to bring us down.
Clinton's policies took about 2 years to take affect, actually by the second year the economy started turning back around.
It usually takes a president's policies 2 years to take effect. Oh wait, are you trying to tell us that Clinton caused this mess we're in? Sorry, that is laughable.


You are stoned. As well as one of the few people that didn't vote for Reagan in 1984. Biggest landslide election...EVER.
Toph
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 2803
Joined: Wed Dec 12, 2007 3:43 am
Location: Springfield, MA

Postby chowhall » Thu Nov 06, 2008 12:30 pm

Toph wrote:You are stoned. As well as one of the few people that didn't vote for Reagan in 1984. Biggest landslide election...EVER.


My vote for Post of the day.
Chow
chowhall
8 Track
 
Posts: 628
Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2007 11:25 am
Location: styxworld

Postby Tanirocker » Thu Nov 06, 2008 1:12 pm

Toph wrote:
You are stoned. As well as one of the few people that didn't vote for Reagan in 1984. Biggest landslide election...EVER.



Sorry...I know he's considered St. Ronnie to some, but I'm not a fan. I don't care what a landslide he got. I didn't vote for Reagan either time, and I'm proud of that.

Before Reagan, the US was the world's #1 creditor nation.
Under Reagan, we became the world's #1 debtor nation.
Under Reagan, we had an illegal sale of arms to Iran, in order to illegally support the Contras, who were trying to overthrow a democratically elected government.

It wasn't exactly our best moment as a nation.
Tani
the LA-LA girl
Tanirocker
Ol' 78
 
Posts: 81
Joined: Wed Jan 29, 2003 9:22 am
Location: Sunny So Cal

Postby chowhall » Thu Nov 06, 2008 10:12 pm

Tanirocker wrote:
Toph wrote:
You are stoned. As well as one of the few people that didn't vote for Reagan in 1984. Biggest landslide election...EVER.



Sorry...I know he's considered St. Ronnie to some, but I'm not a fan. I don't care what a landslide he got. I didn't vote for Reagan either time, and I'm proud of that.

Before Reagan, the US was the world's #1 creditor nation.
Under Reagan, we became the world's #1 debtor nation.
Under Reagan, we had an illegal sale of arms to Iran, in order to illegally support the Contras, who were trying to overthrow a democratically elected government.

It wasn't exactly our best moment as a nation.


Are you talking about the democratically elected government of Daniel Ortega?

from wikipedia

Ortega's policies became more moderate during his time in opposition, and he gradually reduced much of his former Marxist rhetoric in favor of an agenda of more moderate democratic socialism. His Roman Catholic faith has become more intense in recent years as well, leading Ortega to embrace a variety of socially conservative policies; in 2006 the FSLN endorsed a strict law banning all abortions in Nicaragua.

Yea he's a real Democracy lover. You should look at all of the flip flops on this by the US Congress.
Chow
chowhall
8 Track
 
Posts: 628
Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2007 11:25 am
Location: styxworld

Postby elmotano » Fri Nov 07, 2008 12:35 am

Toph wrote:
elmotano wrote:
hoagiepete wrote:
elmotano wrote:
hoagiepete wrote:
Hollywood wrote:
yogi wrote:Stupid Me I thought Bill Clinton was The President that ushered in NAFTA???????????????


He had no choice but to sign it. The House and Senate had the majority to send it back if he used his veto. This was George HW Bush and congress' law. Bill Clinton softly voiced his opposition. Many people forget that Clinton's first year was rough.

Blaming Clinton for NAFTA is as bad as giving Reagan credit for freeing the Iranian hostages. The Carter administration had worked the whole thing out and Reagan takes office and claims credit.

Bush has done a lot wrong and unfortunately it will overshadow the positive thing he may have done. The worst president ever is a HUGE stretch. 9/11 was devastating to him, as it would have been to Gore. Iraq compounded this and his poor economic policies.


I guess it all comes around eventually. Clinton then took credit for the economy created by Reaganomics.


Actually, Clinton saved us from Reaganomics.....aka trickle down economics. This worked well for the first 4 years of Reagan's time. But then rich people's sphincters got super tight and the cash stopped trickling. It took 2 years of Clinton policies to straighten the ship.


I don't agree. Better look back. The effects didn't fully kick in until the end of Reagan's term and through Clinton's. Enlighten me what Clinton did to right the ship.


Don't need to look back, I lived through it. Actually voted for Reagan his first time around. Voted against him the second time around, trickle down economics was already starting to bring us down.
Clinton's policies took about 2 years to take affect, actually by the second year the economy started turning back around.
It usually takes a president's policies 2 years to take effect. Oh wait, are you trying to tell us that Clinton caused this mess we're in? Sorry, that is laughable.


You are stoned. As well as one of the few people that didn't vote for Reagan in 1984. Biggest landslide election...EVER.


Stoned? uh no not at the moment. What can I say, I was one of the few who saw what was happening, kinda like now.
Reagan did wonders for rebuilding our military long term. but, the economy long term, not so much.

I guess being that I am not Dem or Rep, I am allowed to see things for what they really are.
I wonder how did you become such a staunch Rep?
elmotano
45 RPM
 
Posts: 284
Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2007 5:13 am

Postby LordofDaRing » Fri Nov 07, 2008 5:04 am

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081106/ap_ ... _pays#full

Boy this just gets better and better doesn't it...
LordofDaRing
8 Track
 
Posts: 984
Joined: Fri Mar 28, 2003 12:49 pm

Postby The_Noble_Cause » Fri Nov 07, 2008 2:22 pm

elmotano wrote:Iran let the hostages go immediately after Reagan became president because, Reagan had the rep of a cowboy we was ready to kick some ass and because Iran wanted to make Carter look week.


Ever hear of October Surprise?
Aside from being Governor, at the time Reagan was known for little besides red-baiting, being GE's # 1 corporate mouthpiece, oh, and maybe "Bedtime for Bonzo."

Image
"I think we should all sue this women for depriving us of our God given right to go down with a clear mind, and good thoughts." - Stu, Consumate Pussy Eater
User avatar
The_Noble_Cause
Super Audio CD
 
Posts: 16056
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 9:14 am
Location: Lake Titicaca

Postby Skates » Fri Nov 07, 2008 5:32 pm

Toph wrote:
You are stoned. As well as one of the few people that didn't vote for Reagan in 1984. Biggest landslide election...EVER.


Actually, Nixon in 72 was the biggest-49 states.
Skates
Ol' 78
 
Posts: 101
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2007 8:30 pm

Postby Tanirocker » Wed Nov 12, 2008 10:35 pm

chowhall wrote:Are you talking about the democratically elected government of Daniel Ortega?

from wikipedia

Ortega's policies became more moderate during his time in opposition, and he gradually reduced much of his former Marxist rhetoric in favor of an agenda of more moderate democratic socialism. His Roman Catholic faith has become more intense in recent years as well, leading Ortega to embrace a variety of socially conservative policies; in 2006 the FSLN endorsed a strict law banning all abortions in Nicaragua.

Yea he's a real Democracy lover. You should look at all of the flip flops on this by the US Congress.


Ortega's policies are irrelevant. He was democratically elected. The people of Nicaragua overthrew a dictator and elected a president. If we as Americans believe in democracy, we shouldn't be undermining the democratic process in other nations.

All other considerations aside, it was illegal, in violation of the Boland Amendment.
Tani
the LA-LA girl
Tanirocker
Ol' 78
 
Posts: 81
Joined: Wed Jan 29, 2003 9:22 am
Location: Sunny So Cal

Postby chowhall » Thu Nov 13, 2008 10:11 am

Tanirocker wrote:
chowhall wrote:Are you talking about the democratically elected government of Daniel Ortega?

from wikipedia

Ortega's policies became more moderate during his time in opposition, and he gradually reduced much of his former Marxist rhetoric in favor of an agenda of more moderate democratic socialism. His Roman Catholic faith has become more intense in recent years as well, leading Ortega to embrace a variety of socially conservative policies; in 2006 the FSLN endorsed a strict law banning all abortions in Nicaragua.

Yea he's a real Democracy lover. You should look at all of the flip flops on this by the US Congress.


Ortega's policies are irrelevant. He was democratically elected. The people of Nicaragua overthrew a dictator and elected a president. If we as Americans believe in democracy, we shouldn't be undermining the democratic process in other nations.

All other considerations aside, it was illegal, in violation of the Boland Amendment.


Adolf Hitler was legally elected also.
Chow
chowhall
8 Track
 
Posts: 628
Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2007 11:25 am
Location: styxworld

Postby Tanirocker » Thu Nov 13, 2008 11:30 am

chowhall wrote:Adolf Hitler was legally elected also.



Come on, Chow. Please don't bring Hitler into this. Hitler was a monster behind the murder of millions. In Nicaragua, it was the Contras who were killing people in an effort to overthrow the will of the people. You don't like Ortega's economic views, and that's fine. I'm sure that I don't agree with him on a lot of things, but it doesn't put him into the same category as Hitler. FWIW, I say the same thing when people try to put Bush in the same category as Hitler.

I'll tell ya, I'm really not up to arguing about the way I voted 24 years ago. I've seen a lot of ugliness in the name of political discourse lately, and I'm really burned out on it. Recently, I've been reminded of just how short life is, and while I love history and political discourse, I don't want to waste time on fruitless arguments.

So...let me end this by saying that I'm just glad that I live in a time and place where we have elections and peaceful transfers of power, instead of living in fear.

Peace...
Tani
the LA-LA girl
Tanirocker
Ol' 78
 
Posts: 81
Joined: Wed Jan 29, 2003 9:22 am
Location: Sunny So Cal

Postby chowhall » Thu Nov 13, 2008 10:40 pm

Tanirocker wrote:
chowhall wrote:Adolf Hitler was legally elected also.



Come on, Chow. Please don't bring Hitler into this. Hitler was a monster behind the murder of millions. In Nicaragua, it was the Contras who were killing people in an effort to overthrow the will of the people. You don't like Ortega's economic views, and that's fine. I'm sure that I don't agree with him on a lot of things, but it doesn't put him into the same category as Hitler. FWIW, I say the same thing when people try to put Bush in the same category as Hitler.

I'll tell ya, I'm really not up to arguing about the way I voted 24 years ago. I've seen a lot of ugliness in the name of political discourse lately, and I'm really burned out on it. Recently, I've been reminded of just how short life is, and while I love history and political discourse, I don't want to waste time on fruitless arguments.

So...let me end this by saying that I'm just glad that I live in a time and place where we have elections and peaceful transfers of power, instead of living in fear.

Peace...


I know Ortega is not on the same level as Hitler. The Democrats policy on the Contras was inconsistent at best and immoral at worst. We started a fight, we quit in the middle, and we got reinvolved. There is enough blame for both sides on that issue. The Republicans weren't saints and neither were the Democrats. In retrospect, I'd have continued suppling a force we started in the first place.
Chow
chowhall
8 Track
 
Posts: 628
Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2007 11:25 am
Location: styxworld

Postby MCM » Fri Nov 14, 2008 1:41 am

Tanirocker wrote:So...let me end this by saying that I'm just glad that I live in a time and place where we have elections and peaceful transfers of power, instead of living in fear.

Peace...[/color]



A sentiment we should not forget, we are very fortunate.
MCM
45 RPM
 
Posts: 327
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2007 12:05 pm
Location: Western Pennsylvania, USA

Previous

Return to Styx

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests