Who is Althouse? * View only LAW posts * Contribute * Use my Amazon Portal
Bill isn't running and Newt isn't speaker of the house.Whats the point of the poll? To demonstrate that anyone is more trustworthy on the economy than Obama?
And?What is someone supposed to do with that information?
A rational attitude by the public: Clinton has demonstrated positive results. Obama is blatantly negative and destructive. Romney is as yet unknown.
"What is someone supposed to do with that information?"Whatever you can.I could think of: People remember the Clinton administration as a time when the economy was good and there was a surplus in the budget. People tend to look at the situation and hold the President responsible, which is hurting Obama now. Romney's in the neutral position.
He's unknown, but hardly great.Willie lied his way through 8 years of misfeasance and nonfeasance in office and some people are still stupid enough to buy it.The "peace and prosperity" were all illusion.Just shows how the power of the Centralized Media is thankfully waning.The power of Decentralized Media is in the Romster's good showing.
PS The "surplus" in the budget was all in the out years and Bobby Rubin and Co. swept EnRon and DotCom under the rug for the next Administration.Not to mention the joy of subprime mortgages.
I read this as voters stressing the lack of faith in Obama's ability to handle the economy.
Incidentally, Bill Clinton has an American birth certificate; and Bill Clinton is not a Communist.Those are not criticisms of FauxBama. That's only scientific reporting now that CNN has unleashed itself and started to report such interesting facts.
Well yeah--but Billy Jeff is not on the ballot--Thank God! The Republic passed that kidney stone in 2000, and hardly needs a return engagement. And his "parting gift" to the economy in the 2000 dot com crash hurt a lot of us---bad.
traditionalguy said...Incidentally, Bill Clinton has an American birth certificate; and Bill Clinton is not a Communist.He isn't?Then somebody needs to 'splain why he was so hot to send Elian Gonzales back to Cuba or why he led anti-war demonstrations while he was a Rhodes candidate in England or that little trip to Moscow for a week in '69.
Ann Althouse said..."What is someone supposed to do with that information?"Whatever you can.I could think of: People remember the Clinton administration as a time when the economy was good and there was a surplus in the budget. People tend to look at the situation and hold the President responsible, which is hurting Obama now. Romney's in the neutral position.6/11/12 10:33 AMThanks to Newt Clinton didn't actually do anything other than raise taxes while the economy started an upswing. That and inheriting the peace dividend after the collapse of the Warsaw Pact. Winning a lottery doesn't make one a financial wizard. Just lucky. Bill was fortunate indeed to have Hillarycare defeated and losing Congress. Otherwise he would have gone left and have been a premature Obama failure. But give Clinton credit; as a politician he is infinitely more competent than Obama. At least he knew who to turn lemons into lemonade.
How anyone can trust Obama on the economy at this point is completely beyond my comprehension.
55% of voters trust Bill Clinton more than Obama on the economy.When you've spent nearly 12 years listening to the State-Run Media's lie about the Syphilitic Hillbilly's nonexistent budget "surplus," no wonder.Incidentally Bill Clinton has an American birth certificate;Unlike Preezy Choom. He ate the dog that ate his BC.and Bill Clinton is not a Communist.Maybe not a card-carrying one, but he's like most Democrats in their worshipful fellating of Marxist thugs. If he didn't establish the socialist model the SCOAMF is hot to trot for, it wasn't for lack of trying.
"What is someone supposed to do with that information?"The same thing one does with the "information" that the Universe exists. Marvel.
Best thing you can as President is to preside over some kind of bubble, and then get out before it bursts.
To be quite honest,Ann , a crack addled Bangkok whore knows more about economics than anyone in this administration. Just sayin'
What do you do with this information is a very good question. In each case you can ask, does this work as a pop-up? And the answer is yes, but for whom? So no, not really. Verdict: useless.
"Incidentally, Bill Clinton has an American birth certificate; and Bill Clinton is not a Communist."Incidentally, the same is true of Barack Obama.
I trust throwing darts at a board labeled "what to do now" than Obama.
The information in those poll numbers isn't about anyone named in the poll. This is a statistic about the ignorance and credulity of the body politic.To the extent that they buy their own bullshit, politicians and cabinet buttholes and Fed charimen and so on are like children at steering wheels of a toy car on a carousel acting as if they're guiding the ride.How can the words "We've created... jobs," come from Obama's, or any politician's mouth without everyone in the room tossing their breakfast?
People who look to the past too fondly never see what is approaching in the present and can't anticipate what will happen in the future. (IMO)
Related, sort of:http://news.yahoo.com/obama-girl-not-excited-2012-won-t-endorse-193610215.htmlThe Obama girl won't say whether she's still Obama's girl.
This is like picking which cheerleader is most likely to win the football game.The problem is that the cheerleaders can't keep their damned hands off of the ball.
It's not saying much, but I trust Bill Clinton more than Obama on anything, except with my girlfriend or daughter.
Well, yeah.Clinton was probably the best president we've ever had on free trade. He supported it just as strongly as Reagan and GHW Bush, and he could explain it better.To be sure, Clinton was really really lucky. He benefited from the boom caused by the cheap money policies of the Fed that triggered multiple busts after he left office (internet, housing, banks). He benefited from the end of the Cold War and the draw down of defense spending. He benefited from a Republican House determined to control spending (at least a little) allowing him to claim the mantle of deficit-reducer.But Clinton knew his stuff. He knew his classical economics and he knew that growth was tied to productivity. He didn't pretend that deficits didn't matter and he didn't pretend that wasting money was its own stimulus.
Cookie...I had them wondering about Obama. That's called journalism.The Communist quotient in an Arkansas Clinton's DNA compared to Obama's Luo Tribe Kenyan DNA is an important analysis that we will need to discuss daily for several months, now that the War on Women has gone flat and Bain Capitalism has been deemed sterling rather than vulture.IMO Bill Clinton is a perfect Dr Zhivago character named Komarovsky played by Rod Steiger. When Communists may win, then he plays the cards he is dealt.The result for Zhivago was a war on Laura and his daughter
Clinton's supposed success in managing the economy was not because of anything he did, it was in spite of his horrendous economic policies, particularly in his first term. Clinton owes Microsoft and Intel, big time, because it was they, more than anything else, including Clinton, that fueled the roaring economy of the 90s.
100% of me trusts Zombie Moe Howard more than Obama on the economy.
Moe Howard's leadership was beyond question. They just don't make stooges like that anymore.
This makes me happy for Clinton.Obama tried to destroy him and his record so he (Obama) could beat his wife in the primaries.I'm happy it seems not to have worked.
Theissen - "Obama and Reid have it precisely backward: It’s the public sector that’s doing fine. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the unemployment rate for government workers last month was just 4.2 percent (up slightly from 3.9 percent a year ago). Compare that to private-sector industries such as construction (14.2 percent unemployment), leisure and hospitality services (9.7 percent), agriculture (9.5 percent), professional and business services (8.5 percent) and wholesale and retail trade (8.1 percent). As Andrew Biggs of the American Enterprise Institute points out, the public-sector unemployment rate “is the lowest of any industry or class of worker, even including the growing energy industry.” If the rest of Americans enjoyed the same unemployment rate as government workers, Obama would be cruising to reelection."---------------What has happened is that in an economic downturn, you start with bad times in core wealth-generating sectors, like finance. Which then affects housing prices and construction. Which eventually hits restaurant, tourism, even dental services for non-government insured workers (there is a lag as people keep spending anticipating things will soon rebound - then realize no rebound is happening).All through this growth in unemployment, the Hero Workers of the Government are the last to be considered for layoffs...and the first because of being government workers, to demand the mayor in the same Government complex, the Governor who runs them, the President and Congress in the Imperial City - insure their jobs, pay, bennies, and promotions are not affected in bad times like the private sector rabble the Hero Government Workers manage and "help".
(there is a lag as people keep spending anticipating things will soon rebound - then realize no rebound is happening).First, how much of that is offset by people that start putting off purchases early thinking they may need the reserves, but realize we're in for a much longer bad patch and then start spending on "musts"?Second, is it possible for you to get through a posting without using the word "heroes" without constantly attaching the negativity? A stretch perhaps. Consider it a request.
edutcher - " Bill Clinton is not a Communist."He isn't?Then somebody needs to 'splain why he was so hot to send Elian Gonzales back to Cuba or why he led anti-war demonstrations while he was a Rhodes candidate in England or that little trip to Moscow for a week in '69.============================1. Bill Clinton did the right thing with Gonzales...idiot right wing and Cuban exile politics aside. The US strongly fights for the principle of returning US-born citizens to their natural parent if one without custody rights ferrets them out of America, or worse dies overseas then a pack of foreign relatives or the State insists that they have more right to the children than the natural mother or father here.We fight the Swedes, the Mexicans, etc. strong on this. We have used the Swiss and economic sanctions when Iran insists that the children of an Iranian father, after he died kidnapping the kids to Iran, belong to Allah and Iran, not with their natural mother in America.With Gonzales, we had all sorts of blather about how Freedom!! trumped a good father who was back in Cuba and that the kid was better with a pack of relatives of the mother, all who had criminal records, but who were all "Freedom LOvers who hated Castro".I applaud Bill Clinton for putting parental rights above idiot idealogues. 2. Being against the Vietnam War does not make one a Communist anymore than opposing the 8 major wars and nation-building adventures the Neocons want makes someone a radical Muslim.3. If visiting Russia makes someone a Communist, does visiting Israel make someone a Jew?
Scott M -I am sort of overly observent of the "Hero meme" both sides have taken to using remorselessly to advocate their positions after Rudy resurrected it for select classes of government employees in the wake of 9/11, with Bush using the word in every speech thereon - and liberals embraced it for Hero Victims.I am overly observant because I read a piece about WWI where nations regularly began using "Hero" for everything to drum up the flagging support for endless war and slaughter. Britain had the Hero Mothers of the Fallen, Germany declared dogs and horses sent to war - heroes. Orders were issued to reserve certain favorite sausages made with spices very scarce with the war - as for Heroes Who Serve - only. France decided to call government workers issuing rations heroes, and wine designated for the Front was "hero wine. And mangled and dead soldiers returning from the Front rode in "Heroes-Only allowed" trains with hero nurses and hero doctors in attendance until the body or recovered hero soldier was presented to the Hero mother. So the present situation in America of calling everything your political side favors as tied to some form of heroism - is not without historical precedent. Something to ponder as we talk about soldiers all made instant heroes by enlistment or oath of commission. Democrats talking about hero welfare mommas struggling to raise 8 chilluns...or hero OWS activists..
Something to ponder as we talk about soldiers all made instant heroes by enlistment or oath of commission.Does your overly observant nature lead you to your antisemitism or does it just come naturally?Your attempt at equivalency between people that volunteer to put others before themselves and "welfare mommas" is both ridiculous and illuminating.
Who is really further off target: the one who sees too many "heroes", or the one who can't see any through the chaff, or more accurately, refuses to give them their due. They both diminish the true heroes, but only the cynic does it on purpose.
I'd trust Bill Clinton more about Brazilian supermodels than I do Barack Hussein Kardashian with the US economy. 65%!
Someone who fights for freedom could be a hero. My freedom is not at stake in western Asia. It is under attack in North America. The endless wars of the ruling class are a major feature of the attack.Lauding the selfless heroism of every single person in uniform, either military or domestic enforcer or what have you, is propaganda. I feel for those of them who have suffered and died but they did none of it for me.The question of propaganda language is a separate matter. Any attempt to characterize my rejection of propaganda as being against "the troops" is just more propaganda. It's a simple minded little trap - yelling "support the troops" when you mean "support the war".I'll choose my own heroes and they won't be common enough to fill stadiums. The idea that a teacher is a hero is just embarrassing. And if taking it easy qualifies you as a hero that's the only way most police officers will get close. Anyone who is not such a dimwit as to swallow simple propaganda might do something heroic at any moment. Like speak the truth. To do only that much was an act of bravery in this country in 1917. May we never see masters as bold as that again.
I served. I was in the Gulf War. I went in mainly on family tradition and ROTC helping make college affordable.I consider very few who I served with, actual heroes.My cousin is a police detective and my sister a RN and another cousin is a teacher. They feel the same way about all the rhetoric of what "Heroes" their co-workers and they are. (Eyeball rolling).PS - I also served as a volunteer firefighter for 17 years. I joined from civic duty and because I had the full AF training program. People I "served with" many still "serving" the small city so we don't have to hire full time "heroes" - enjoyed doing it. We "went into burning buildings that mere civilians fled from" because we were trained, had full protective gear, hose teams and trained rescue folks behind us that had our back if something happened. At best a moderate risk, but so is driving the route to work..Many of the volunteers did suck up avidly on all the post 9/11 pandering on what awesome heroes they were. Mostly the newer members. I did come back now and then and help out...had fun doing the training on 13,800.00 worth of free "evildoer radiation detection gear" for hero 1st responders, the Feds gave them.
Can you tell your heroes apart?http://www.theagitator.com/2012/01/16/take-the-quiz/
or why... that little trip to Moscow for a week in '69.Clinton was ahead of his time. He knew that in two decades all the hot tennis ladies would be coming out of Russia. "Lemme help you with my racket, little lady."
Is this supposed to be surprising somehow?
Post a Comment