Keeping up with the Clintons

[Ash]

Originally Posted by flippedgazelle

Yup. That's why so many Repub- err, Staunch Conservatives - were upset with the previous regime. The bail-out of Wall St., AIG, etc. is antithetical to their doctrine.

In a funny kind of reversal, many Americans (like me) were upset of Bush/Cheney's "unPatriot Act" because it smacks of fascism and impinges on some fundamental American rights. So what happens? Obama is using some of the authority granted by the "unPatriot Act". Go figure...

Conservatism... advocating the preservation of the best in society and opposing radical changes... an economic philosophy of prudence in government spending and debt... emphasizing respect for traditional institutions, distrust of government activism, and opposition to sudden change in the established order.

...none of these definitions mean no spending... prudent spending is always good, no matter what the party - I'm not sure GWB and his group fits that description - I'm sure he (as well as many others) would have considered himself a conservative.

I've digressed, though - this was supposed to be about the Clintons.
What did Bill do? He signed the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993, mandating large employers to allow employees to take unpaid leave for pregnancy or a serious medical condition. Imprudent?

He ratified NAFTA - doing away with tariffs that the govt would have gained from imports. Sounds bad... ?positive for Mexico, poverty falling and real income rising (with lower prices of especially food), even after accounting for the 1994–1995 economic crisis. Critics may say it's imbalanced, but economic development for a good neighbour - imprudent?

He expanded the Earned Income Tax Credit, a subsidy for low income workers - helping out those in tough economic hardship (perhaps at the expense of higher tax on the rich)... imprudent?

He spearheaded a task force to look into the universal health care scheme... giving more accessible health care to the masses - making the population as a whole more healthy, more productive... imprudent?

I don't know but these kinds of activities seem to be a good use of taxes... (just my opinion)

[flippedgazelle]

"I may not have been the greatest president, but I've had the most fun eight years." –Bill Clinton

[Wheatfield]

Originally Posted by seacapt

Of course he is well educated and learned. He worked the system to avoid the draft and stay in school.

I'm sure he could have gone to school and still served in the military. The draft wasn't a life sentence, only a 4 year term.
OTOH, if that explains GWB's apparent lack of education or intelligence, it doesn't say much for the people who didn't avoid the draft.

[Jodokast96]

Originally Posted by Ash

What did Bill do? He signed the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993, mandating large employers to allow employees to take unpaid leave for pregnancy or a serious medical condition. Imprudent?

Possibly

Originally Posted by Ash

He ratified NAFTA - doing away with tariffs that the govt would have gained from imports. Sounds bad... ?positive for Mexico, poverty falling and real income rising (with lower prices of especially food), even after accounting for the 1994–1995 economic crisis. Critics may say it's imbalanced, but economic development for a good neighbour - imprudent?

Ask Canada how well it worked for them. And if things are so good in Mexico, why are the numbers coming here higher than ever?

Originally Posted by Ash

He expanded the Earned Income Tax Credit, a subsidy for low income workers - helping out those in tough economic hardship (perhaps at the expense of higher tax on the rich)... imprudent?

Yes.

Originally Posted by Ash

He spearheaded a task force to look into the universal health care scheme... giving more accessible health care to the masses - making the population as a whole more healthy, more productive... imprudent?

At least you acknowledge it's nothing more than a scheme.

Originally Posted by Ash

I don't know but these kinds of activities seem to be a good use of taxes... (just my opinion)

Last time I checked, taxes were for funding operation of the government. Not forcing Bill to give Bob an economic hand, and certainly not for taking control of two of the largest of a countries industries.

[Wheatfield]

Originally Posted by graphicgr8s

So a bunch of liberal based "facts".

Clinton benefited from the peacetime dividend. Of course he also didn't do any "maintenance" so Bush had to rebuild and repair. And because of Slick's inaction we of course had the incident on 9-11-01.

And looking at one of your links above even though people had higher wages during Slick people had more to spend during Bush. Just because you make more doesn't mean you have more. Taxes were also higher under Slick. And they will be much much higher during the Big O's reign.

President Clinton flew a bunch of airplanes into some large office towers? Aren't you the one who proposes from time to time that people take responsibility for their own actions?
Ultimately, the people responsible for 9-11-01 were some Muslim extremeists who learned how to fly airplanes in your own country.
And no, they didn't get into the USA via Canada, that myth has been debunked already, just in case you wanted to play that card next.

[Wheatfield]

Originally Posted by Jodokast96

Ask Canada how well it worked for them. And if things are so good in Mexico, why are the numbers coming here higher than ever?

Most of our problems with NAFTA have been cause by American protectionism, not by the trade deal itself.
Protectionism does seem to be one of the strong points of the Democratic presidents.

[Ash]

Originally Posted by Jodokast96

Yes.

Because you say so?

[Jodokast96]

Originally Posted by Ash

Because you say so?

Would you have asked that if I said no? Thought not.

[Ash]

Originally Posted by Jodokast96

Would you have asked that if I said no? Thought not.

Why would I need to ask, if it were true?

[Jodokast96]

Originally Posted by Ash

Why would I need to ask, if it were true?

Why, because you say so?

[Ash]

Originally Posted by Jodokast96

Why, because you say so?

OK, so nobody's telling the truth.
What the point of your argument, then?

[flippedgazelle]

It's hard to believe that Chelsea is going to turn 30 next year.

[Jodokast96]

Huh? Do you even read what you write? What's next out of you? "I know you are but what am I?"

[Gooshin]

[Jodokast96]

Goosh, that was great!