Subject:
|
Re: How many things need to stack up before we throw this jerk out?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Mon, 14 Jul 2003 15:47:00 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
308 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Mike Petrucelli wrote:
> > Additionally (though not
> > conclusively) I've heard the point put forth most vehemently by
> > conservative pundits, who conveniently interpret the results in a way that
> > favors >Republican administrations.
>
> Well I have heard the same thing from liberals favoring Democratic
> admistrations that is why I tend to accept it moreso than not.
But have you heard Democratic administrations using the apparent ten-year
delay as evidence of the strength of their own policies (ie, those that come to
fruition during Republican administrations) or to commend Republicans for
enacting policies that bear fruit during later Democratic administrations? My
point is that, if the ten-year-swing is used by both parties equally to praise
themselves and to malign their opponents, then the ten-year-swing is no good
indicator of anything.
> > Additionally, the Reagan tax cut preceded a huge deficit that can't be
> > readily blamed on Carter. Should we blame Ford and Nixon instead? Also, if
> > the economy makes a massive recovery in 2005, is Dubya going to say "Thank
> > Bill Clinton" or
>
> No.
>
> > is he going to claim success of his reward-the-rich stimulus package?
>
> Well duh.
But that's my point! Dubya (or at least his supporters) blame Clinton for
current economic woes because, alledgly, the impact of Clinton's policies is
only now being seen (due to the 10-year-swing). But if we experience an
economic turnaround, then Dubya (et al) will claim victory for the
reward-the-rich package, even though it'll be far too early (by their own
calculations) to make determinations about such policies!
Interestingly, early in Dubya's appointment, he asserted that he wouldn't
resort to blaming previous administrations for problems during his tenure.
However, soon after 9/11, elements of his administration were blaming it on
intelligence failures during Clinton's administration, just as elements have
blamed (and are still blaming) subsequent economic woes on Clinton. This, from
the man who claimed that he would restore dignity and integrity to the
Whitehouse.
"The buck stops somewhere else." -- George W. Bush.
Dave!
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
81 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
