Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (29773)	8/17/2000 12:51:21 PM
From: Bill	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

That's nonsense, Ken. There isn't one reputable economist who ascribes today's robust economy to Clinton. NAFTA is Clinton's sole contribution, and even that was initiated by Pres Bush.

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (29773)	8/17/2000 12:59:45 PM
From: J.B.C.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

The dem's gave us the ponzi scheme social security, tried to give us the ponzi scheme nationalized health care (blocked by republicans) and therefore the republicans were irresponsible. Stop it you're killing me. Jim

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (29773)	8/17/2000 1:15:01 PM
From: Frank Griffin	Respond to of 769667

Mr. Phillipps, Gore and Clinton are clearly big government, tax and spenders. The blessing that Gore and Clinton got is an economy that wasn't doing bad when they arrived. But, the really big benefit to America and to Clinton and Gore was the election of a Republican Congress, house and senate, in 1994. If we would have had a democrat house and senate the picture would have been much, much different now. The Republicans held Gore and Clinton in check to a great degree and, at least, slowed their big spending ways enough to help. Remember, the President proposes spending and the Congress disposes. i.e. controls. Be thankful for a Republican house and senate. It saved us.

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (29773)	8/17/2000 1:22:46 PM
From: Father Terrence	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769667

Sounds like historical re-vision to me. The fact of the matter is that if Clinton had been successful in getting his National (socialized) health Care program through there would now be HUGE debts looming. Second, if Gore had gotten his BTU tax, the economy would now be in the doldrums. The only thing that stood opposing a future economic Waterloo (where Clinton played Napolean) was the Republican Congress. When you add in the fact that Clinton soaked the middle-class with his robber-baron tax increases in the early 90s and that Al Greenspan remained the head of the Fed (a Clinton decision to keep him on, I'll give Bill the nod there), it all adds up to "surpluses" that may or may not be real surpluses. And where did Al Greenspan come from?... * Economic advisor to Richard M. Nixon * Economic advisor to Gerald Ford * Economic advisor to Ronald Reagan * Later appointed and approved as Federal Reserve Chairman ... from the Republicans. Finally, Ronald Reagan's much criticized "supply-side" economic principles have been proven to work. Former President George Bush was wrong to call them "voodoo economics." Reagan's elimination of the stagflation of the Jimmy Carter years, coupled with (the then) greatest economic expansion in the nation's history, combined to create a base for the economic explosion in the 90s. The recession of 1991 was mild and like a pull back from the expansion, just like you see in the stock market when prices are hitting new highs. The Internet and technology also have contributed mightily to the economic expansion (which no politician has had anything to do with -- although a few have tried to hinder it). FT

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (29773)	8/17/2000 3:13:25 PM
From: jlallen	Respond to of 769667

LOL!! Yep. Slavery is freedom, black is white and night is day too! JLA