Selling off national forest and national parks? TU alert

"Bill McKee" wrote in message
k.net...

"vincent p. norris" wrote in message
...
The economy is important too.

Forbes Magazine said, a couple of years ago, that Clinton had the best
economic record of any president since WW II.

I don't suppose you remember a guy named Forbes who wanted to be the
REPUBLICAN candidate for the Presidency a few years ago.

vince

That is because Clinton was lucky. Lucky in that he had a Republican
Congress that actually controlled the spending for a couple of years, and
the huge dot.bomb bust that cranked up a huge amount of surplus money to
the Fed's.

Hee, hee, hee.

Wolfgang

Bill McKee wrote:

That is because Clinton was lucky. Lucky in that he had a Republican
Congress that actually controlled the spending for a couple of years ...

Thing is, you really believe this nonsense, don't you?.....

Bill McKee wrote:

That is because Clinton was lucky. Lucky in that he had a Republican
Congress that actually controlled the spending for a couple of years, and
the huge dot.bomb bust that cranked up a huge amount of surplus money to the
Fed's.

If I have to choose between a lucky, intelligent, involved, popular,
randy-assed President and, well, lets just say someone the opposite,
that's an easy choice.

BTW, I see that those Republicans are doing a phenomenally ****ty job of
controlling spending now that they've controlled both houses of Congress
and the Presidency for the past five years. Somehow, I feel it must be
Clinton's fault, but I can't figure out exactly how.

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

Somehow, I feel it must be
Clinton's fault, but I can't figure out exactly how.

Geez, I don't know why you're having trouble with that!

Clinton's a Democrat.

See how easy it is? ((:-))

vince

"JR" wrote in message ...
Bill McKee wrote:

That is because Clinton was lucky. Lucky in that he had a Republican
Congress that actually controlled the spending for a couple of years ...

Thing is, you really believe this nonsense, don't you?.....

Yup! And I am a Democrat. Moderate, not the ultra lefties that have control
now. And Newt and the Contract with America actually slowed down the
spending. A few years and an election later, that good point disappeared.
And all those stock options coming due poured billions in to the State and
Fed coffers. Soon as the option was exercised, 28% went to the Feds, even
if you did not sell the stock. What did Clinton do to help the economy?

"rw" wrote in message
ink.net...
Bill McKee wrote:

That is because Clinton was lucky. Lucky in that he had a Republican
Congress that actually controlled the spending for a couple of years, and
the huge dot.bomb bust that cranked up a huge amount of surplus money to
the Fed's.

If I have to choose between a lucky, intelligent, involved, popular,
randy-assed President and, well, lets just say someone the opposite,
that's an easy choice.

BTW, I see that those Republicans are doing a phenomenally ****ty job of
controlling spending now that they've controlled both houses of Congress
and the Presidency for the past five years. Somehow, I feel it must be
Clinton's fault, but I can't figure out exactly how.

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

Clinton was a failure in my book, just because he had the charisma,
intelligence etc. to make some great fundamental changes. We still have
base line budgeting, amendments to bills do not have to be germane to the
bills, he did nothing concrete about the terrorism attacks during his 8
years. We need to vote out the legislators we now have, a clean sweep.
Both the Republicans and the Democrats have not met a spending bill they did
not like or add pork to. And Bush? Where is the veto? Clinton tried to
run the Federal business just like the single party Arkansas state business.
Does not work that way. And the randyness. You are the CEO of the country.
You do not fool around with the company employees, and at least fat, ugly
employees. Kennedy, at least picked good looking women not in his employ.
And you forget the original investigation was on a probably crooked real
estate deal. Intelligence may be over rated for POTUS. Carter was probably
the smartest POTUS we have had, and he had both an ineffective Presidency,
and part of his legacy is the terrorism we now have. When Iranian's could
take captive our embassy staff with no repercussions, we birthed the modern
terrorism movement.

Bill McKee wrote:

Clinton was a failure in my book, just because he had the charisma,
intelligence etc. to make some great fundamental changes.

You forgot the part about leaving office with record-high surpluses as
far as the eye could see, or at least until the tax-cuts-for-the-rich
crowd got in.

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

"JR" wrote in message ...
Bill McKee wrote:

That is because Clinton was lucky. Lucky in that he had a Republican
Congress that actually controlled the spending for a couple of years
....

Thing is, you really believe this nonsense, don't you?.....

Thing is he does. Lots of folks put it together like Bill. They don't
really have the time or critical facility to keep up, so they tend to string
things together into a plausible rap that closes the loop between what they
thought, and what they think is happening now. It really does "make sense"
to them. The characteristic "tell" for this kind of thinker is that the
story, the rap, is complete, ie it explains the entire situation. It
doesn't depend on observation, experiment, research, confirmation etc. for
personal validity, only on its completeness. It is a personal ideology.

Dave





know how to cross

"rw" wrote in message
nk.net...
Bill McKee wrote:

Clinton was a failure in my book, just because he had the charisma,
intelligence etc. to make some great fundamental changes.

You forgot the part about leaving office with record-high surpluses as far
as the eye could see, or at least until the tax-cuts-for-the-rich crowd
got in.

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

I missed the surplus. So did the accounting office. The integrated federal
budget throws in the Social Security money as income also. If he had a true
surplus the National Debt would not have increased every year of his
administration. And the tax cuts were for everybody. Well except those who
do not pay taxes.

"David Snedeker" wrote in message
. ..

"JR" wrote in message
...
Bill McKee wrote:

That is because Clinton was lucky. Lucky in that he had a Republican
Congress that actually controlled the spending for a couple of years
...

Thing is, you really believe this nonsense, don't you?.....

Thing is he does. Lots of folks put it together like Bill. They don't
really have the time or critical facility to keep up, so they tend to
string
things together into a plausible rap that closes the loop between what
they
thought, and what they think is happening now. It really does "make
sense"
to them. The characteristic "tell" for this kind of thinker is that the
story, the rap, is complete, ie it explains the entire situation. It
doesn't depend on observation, experiment, research, confirmation etc. for
personal validity, only on its completeness. It is a personal ideology.

Dave


Bull ****! Why did the National Debt increase every year of Clinton's
administration? His first 2 years were extreme over spending. And we were
going into a recession at the end of his administration. I am a retired
engineer, and the cognitive ability seems to be more than yours. Why was
Clinton a great POTUS? What did he do to stimulate the economy? What did
he do as POTUS to increase jobs? What did he do to stop terror attacks?
The WTC2 was planned on his watch, and the pilots were trained on his watch.
I am not a supporter of Bush, but am also not a supporter of Clinton. You
sound like my very liberal, school teacher neighbor who thinks Hillary would
be a great POTUS. Why would she be good? No executive leadership position
in her work history. Could not keep husband at least from fooling around
with the hired help. Was a 2nd rate attorney, who could not find her law
firm records for 3 years and they were in the bedroom. There a a lot of
very capable women out there for POTUS. Hillary is not on the list. Now
what reasons do you have to prove the William Jefferson Clinton was a great
President?