By the way your logic "Stagnation does not equal breaking records" Shows that you have little understanding of the economy. Stagnation is when the economy fails to move. Draw a strait line from the charts and see which ones rises faster the one from Clinton years or the Bush Years.

Wait I'll do the math for you and be generous with Bush's and only count the peak in his term.

Dow whent from 3,000 to 11,000 with clinton that's 1000 per year.

Bush whent from 11,000 to 14,000 in 6.5 years. Remember this is the peak i'm not counting when it goes down. That's 450 per year.

How can you say that's good.

But if I wanna be correct I would count before the stock market failed way before so there is no excuse.

After the peak it whent down to 12,000. So that is 266 per year. Compared to 1000 per year with Clinton. Are you serious?

BTW the economy should grow proportional to the population when it does not then there is a problem.

illegalimigrant

The economy can't grow forever. Not at Clinton levels, unless we've started populating like rabbits. Clinton had huge record breakers that would be absolutely impossible to maintain. You hit an economic roof, the fact bush kept it growing, even after the 2001 drop during Sept 11'th is impressive in its own right. Also, the Stock Downtrend was expected. Do you even know why the word "Downtrend" exsists? Because after the kind of Growth seen in the past two decades, you're going to see a huge stock downtrend, similiar to levels seen before the Crisis.

It's no surprise Clinton had a Surplus. He didnt spend very much, kept taxes high, and shut down a plethora of military bases and cut down on troop numbers significantly, which was heavily reversed during the rumsfeld/bush reign.

-$150,000 on clothes and accessories for Palin and family ($75,000 spent at Neiman Marcus).
-$300,000 party ensemble for Cindy McCain
-$21,000 billed to Alaska by Palin for taking her five children on official trips (even when they were not invited)
-$17,000 claimed by Palin in per dime reimbursements from Alaska for nights spent at her OWN family home

...and these people claim to be fiscal conservatives with good ol' small town values who want us to entrust them with the nation's budget?!

Sam_Phisher

38,000, omg, that's sooo much money....not. The rest was billed to the RNC. Which is exactly the kind of stuff its suppose to be used for. Random crap to make the candidates look nice and try any desperate angle to raise poll numbers. This is very, very typical campaign stuff, for both parties.

I'm sorry you are trully delusional. Statistics are biased? You are really brainwashed did you not see the charts and stats. This is not obscure stuff the numbers are there. This is basic stuff. And you are telling me you cant see a pattern. Are you serious. Here is another lie you said. "Oh the unemployment reate when up because of 9/11". Hmm lets see how biased numbers do in this case.

2000-09 4.00

2000-10 3.90

2000-11 3.90

2000-12 3.90

Bush, G.W. 2001-01 4.20 Bush took office

2001-02 4.20

2001-03 4.30

2001-04 4.40

2001-05 4.30

2001-06 4.50

2001-07 4.60

2001-08 4.90

2001-09 5.00

2001-10 5.40

2001-11 5.60 Just in case you cant tell this is 9/11 I bolded it for you

2001-12 5.70

Look uneployment kept rising before 9/11

Tell me this is enough to disprove your own argument.

And I can't post the stock charts but you can clearly see them stagnant.

With clinton DOW went from 3,000 to 11,000. With Bush DOW whent from 11,000 to 14,000 and back down to 12,000. And it when to 12,000 before the financial crysis. Is this not stagnant? Or do you not know the word?

I mean seriously you are just a propaganda machine. I saw your post in your profile you are propaganda. I mean you still think McCain is gonna win. BTW this is clear as day pure numbers how can you not deny your lie?

illegalimigrant

I noticed you stopped showing unemployment numbers, with which continued to decline after we hit 2003. Also, when the dow broke 14,000, the mortgage crisis was already looming, as stated in the article, and consumer confidence was already beginning to come down. So dont even try to pretend it didnt have an affect. Again, you also ignore natural economic trends, which is economics 101.

The fact of the matter is several things affected Bush negatively. The overspending was a major problem. He lowered taxes but didnt cut spending, thats why i hate him. Thats why McCain was against him. he doesnt have to be now, though, as he knows if he gets elected he can cut spending himself, and offset the difference. The Mortgage and Lending Crisis is a big problem, and the Mortgage crisis is ACTUALLY something that's been affecting the economy for several years. The Value of the Dollar going down also didnt help, again, bushes fault for overspending. But overspending =/= a republican policy. It's a bush policy.

Also, one more word to the wise. Propoganda doesnt mean lie. Propoganda means a political promotion, aka saying something that promotes a certain ideology or politicians or political party. It can be true or False. Use the word properly.

[QUOTE="Tolwan"][QUOTE="illegalimigrant"][QUOTE="Tolwan"]

[QUOTE="illegalimigrant"]Once you start blaming Unions you lost all credibility. That is just typical Rush talk. And all your ideals are the same as the Republican policies which guess what? Havent worked. So why continue down that path. I don't think it matter arguing since I see that you will just take the republican words as a sign from God himself. I do not like using the name of God in vain. But you see the whole GOP use it all the time.illegalimigrant

That's a bad debating tactic. Because i have a certain belief set i'm not worth debating with. It's an elitist view, the "You have pathetic views not worth my attention". No, i dont think its words from god himself, thanks for the Ad Hominem though. Some people actually think they're good policies, you know, people who actually *do* know what they're talking about, unlike bush.

You have oppinions but they are strait from Rush word by word. Look I'm not a pure democrat I'm against abortion that is just my view. But I wanna see this country survive for another 10 years. And I cant see and neither can America see that if the policies remain the same. Why wont McCain let the Bush taxes expire? Bussiness already have a lot of loopholes to reduce their contributions to the US. And why should we trust conservative economic policies when they have not worked? I guess you also blame Clinton for the problems of the market.

This is what i like about elections, people use the here and now to judge an overall policy. His policies did work, atleast some of them. Were you not here 2000-2005? The economy prospered, he cut down unemployment by large margines, the Stock Market broke new records, one after the other, etc. etc., However, his overspending and overall carelessness in his second term lead to the downfall of the economy, but by and large there are large elements that ARENT his fault. Any economist will tell you that with every up there is an equal down. This was expected. We had a HUGE up for a decade straight, so this kind of down was expected. however, what made it a crisis was the mortgage bubble bursting and the lending crisis. Our irresponsible credit culture cut us down by the knee's, during the middle of our economic downtrend.

Well I gave you a chance. The stocks were not soaring they were stagnant. I just check the two major ones. Dow and NASDAC. They were going up steadidly untill 94 then they just soared. Came to a screaching halt in 2000 and stayed stagnant for the rest of the eight years. Look it up. Also considering that unimployment was 3.9 when Clinton left and the lowest Bush had was 4.5 its not a very good. I gave you a chance. You completely lied about what you said. Here are my sources. Next time you claim statements as facts put your sources.

http://www.miseryindex.us/urbymonth.asp

http://finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=^DJI#chart4:symbol=^dji;range=my;indicator=volume;charttype=line;crosshair=on;ohlcvalues=0;logscale=on;source=undefined

http://finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=^IXIC#chart3:symbol=^ixic;range=my;indicator=volume;charttype=line;crosshair=on;ohlcvalues=0;logscale=on;source=undefined

Now i know you have no clear idea WHAT happened. The dow Jones broke a RECORD. Did you FORGET THIS: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6658813.stm Stagnation = not breaking records. Oh, and that's an old one. We eventially broke 14,000. Dont use yahoo charts as a source next time, generally good at being biased (Atleast you didnt use MSNBC, thumbs up from me).

Also, it was 4.0 when clinton left office, Rose .2 after the election, and then after September 11'th rose like a nuclear bomb going off in the economic system. My comments on Bush curbing unemployment is the fact he did good at repairing the economic situation after the September 11'th incident.

What's really confusing though, is that a simple google search would have told you all of this.... Also, my talk about economic trends and the mortgage and lending crisis are all basic economics and you know i'm right about them.

[QUOTE="Tolwan"][QUOTE="illegalimigrant"]

I don't have cable. I get my information from google news and mainly from PBS. But McCain does have a 1/5 chance of dying in office. Saw it on the news. Could be wrong. But Palin is just a nut. She is dumb as hell. Yes I saw her interviews;). She also said that there is two types of Americans the patriotic and the not so patriotic. Hmmm I wonder if the patriots are the ones voting for her. As for McCain I used to have respect for him before. And tough he was Ok. But now he has turned to a right winged nut using whatever dishonorable tactics he can to smear Obama.

Here is a question. Did you support Gore in 2000 or Kerry in 2004?

illegalimigrant

In 2000 i didnt really support either candidate. I didnt think bush was bad, just Meh. 2004 i definetly supported Bush, and not for the war. At that time we had amazing job growth, Economic prosperity, The Stock market was breaking records, Bushes policies were working. After 2004 however, he continued to overspend, put in place more government programs and ran down the value of the dollar, combining that with the other looming economic problems that arose around mid 06 and minifested this year, it brought down the economy alltogether. But the economy was doing well at one point under his policies, no one can deny that. But he did spend, a lot, and ran the value of the dollar out of the country, and once the democratic congress got in office, the legislative movement came to a complete hault, so nothing that's come up has been resolved. And the bills that have gotten passed usually are so dramatic they get vetoed.

And you're dead wrong on McCains health. he has no chance of a recurrence of cancer. It didnt even spread throughout his body, it was one invasive melenogma(sp?) mole that was remove, and there'd been no sign of cancer since.

Why would you vote for Bush. Did you not like the Clinton economy? Surplus are bad I guess. And this economic growth you speak of. Where did it go? If his policies were so good why don't we have this huge economic boom you speak of? Overspending. What did Bush overspend in. Wait I remember cutting taxes on the wealthiest. That was his whole policy. How did that work out. But if you say that it will work even though it didn't then yea lets give it another try. Maybe the third time is a charm.

Read my above post.

[QUOTE="Tolwan"]

[QUOTE="illegalimigrant"]Once you start blaming Unions you lost all credibility. That is just typical Rush talk. And all your ideals are the same as the Republican policies which guess what? Havent worked. So why continue down that path. I don't think it matter arguing since I see that you will just take the republican words as a sign from God himself. I do not like using the name of God in vain. But you see the whole GOP use it all the time.illegalimigrant

That's a bad debating tactic. Because i have a certain belief set i'm not worth debating with. It's an elitist view, the "You have pathetic views not worth my attention". No, i dont think its words from god himself, thanks for the Ad Hominem though. Some people actually think they're good policies, you know, people who actually *do* know what they're talking about, unlike bush.

You have oppinions but they are strait from Rush word by word. Look I'm not a pure democrat I'm against abortion that is just my view. But I wanna see this country survive for another 10 years. And I cant see and neither can America see that if the policies remain the same. Why wont McCain let the Bush taxes expire? Bussiness already have a lot of loopholes to reduce their contributions to the US. And why should we trust conservative economic policies when they have not worked? I guess you also blame Clinton for the problems of the market.

This is what i like about elections, people use the here and now to judge an overall policy. His policies did work, atleast some of them. Were you not here 2000-2005? The economy prospered, he cut down unemployment by large margines, the Stock Market broke new records, one after the other, etc. etc., However, his overspending and overall carelessness in his second term lead to the downfall of the economy, but by and large there are large elements that ARENT his fault. Any economist will tell you that with every up there is an equal down. This was expected. We had a HUGE up for a decade straight, so this kind of down was expected. however, what made it a crisis was the mortgage bubble bursting and the lending crisis. Our irresponsible credit culture cut us down by the knee's, during the middle of our economic downtrend.

I don't have cable. I get my information from google news and mainly from PBS. But McCain does have a 1/5 chance of dying in office. Saw it on the news. Could be wrong. But Palin is just a nut. She is dumb as hell. Yes I saw her interviews;). She also said that there is two types of Americans the patriotic and the not so patriotic. Hmmm I wonder if the patriots are the ones voting for her. As for McCain I used to have respect for him before. And tough he was Ok. But now he has turned to a right winged nut using whatever dishonorable tactics he can to smear Obama.

Here is a question. Did you support Gore in 2000 or Kerry in 2004?

illegalimigrant

In 2000 i didnt really support either candidate. I didnt think bush was bad, just Meh. 2004 i definetly supported Bush, and not for the war. At that time we had amazing job growth, Economic prosperity, The Stock market was breaking records, Bushes policies were working. After 2004 however, he continued to overspend, put in place more government programs and ran down the value of the dollar, combining that with the other looming economic problems that arose around mid 06 and minifested this year, it brought down the economy alltogether. But the economy was doing well at one point under his policies, no one can deny that. But he did spend, a lot, and ran the value of the dollar out of the country, and once the democratic congress got in office, the legislative movement came to a complete hault, so nothing that's come up has been resolved. And the bills that have gotten passed usually are so dramatic they get vetoed.

And you're dead wrong on McCains health. he has no chance of a recurrence of cancer. It didnt even spread throughout his body, it was one invasive melenogma(sp?) mole that was remove, and there'd been no sign of cancer since.

Once you start blaming Unions you lost all credibility. That is just typical Rush talk. And all your ideals are the same as the Republican policies which guess what? Havent worked. So why continue down that path. I don't think it matter arguing since I see that you will just take the republican words as a sign from God himself. I do not like using the name of God in vain. But you see the whole GOP use it all the time.illegalimigrant

That's a bad debating tactic. Because i have a certain belief set i'm not worth debating with. It's an elitist view, the "You have pathetic views not worth my attention". No, i dont think its words from god himself, thanks for the Ad Hominem though. Some people actually think they're good policies, you know, people who actually *do* know what they're talking about, unlike bush.

[QUOTE="Tolwan"][QUOTE="ScootyPuff"][QUOTE="Tolwan"]

Do you honestly think Redistributed Wealth and Universal Healthcare is going to help? The Deficit isnt a republican problem, its a bush problem, its an overspending problem. He's grown government dramatically since he's gotten in office, even more so during the economic crisis. And republicans arent exactly happy about it, but its his last term. I can tell you right now McCain's first order of business will be shutting down a large order of government programs and offices, killing earmarks, and as far as the war is concerned, we've already set a more or less unofficial pull-out timetable to be out by 2010 (or was it 2011?) as far as the Iraqi war is concerned.

We need less government, and we definetly can *not* punish businesses for their success. Sure, you're thinking "They can afford it", well, that's because they'll charge more and hire less to make up the cost. Also, the more we tax and the more we regulate, the more they send jobs oversees. And no, Obama's tax credit isnt even close to enough to offset the costs of operating in the US when compared to other countries. Wanna know why economies like China started booming? Low operating costs! Its cheap to hire there, and there's a lot less red-tape!

McCain is a lot more likely to help cut back regulations once the crisis is over, and help restore business confidence in our country, and promote small business growth. And he's DEFINETLY not going to be one to instate socialist programs that are going to cost more much, MUCH more than our country could even dream of affording at this time. And Universal Healthcare certainly isnt going to help business growth, dont forget insurance and hospitals are a business too. Atleast, until the government takes charge. Wanna know what's best for this country? Not obama, that's for damned sure. Certainly, i'd prefer Romney's economic expertise in Office, But McCain will do.

illegalimigrant

McCain is more likely to die 2 weeks after being sworn in.

He's 72, not 92. He's actually not very likely to die at all. He has no standing medical issues whatsoever. His mother is still alive for crying outloud.... And if that's the only point you can bring up against McCain, then he's in good territory right now.

[QUOTE="ScootyPuff"][QUOTE="Tolwan"]

Do you honestly think Redistributed Wealth and Universal Healthcare is going to help? The Deficit isnt a republican problem, its a bush problem, its an overspending problem. He's grown government dramatically since he's gotten in office, even more so during the economic crisis. And republicans arent exactly happy about it, but its his last term. I can tell you right now McCain's first order of business will be shutting down a large order of government programs and offices, killing earmarks, and as far as the war is concerned, we've already set a more or less unofficial pull-out timetable to be out by 2010 (or was it 2011?) as far as the Iraqi war is concerned.

We need less government, and we definetly can *not* punish businesses for their success. Sure, you're thinking "They can afford it", well, that's because they'll charge more and hire less to make up the cost. Also, the more we tax and the more we regulate, the more they send jobs oversees. And no, Obama's tax credit isnt even close to enough to offset the costs of operating in the US when compared to other countries. Wanna know why economies like China started booming? Low operating costs! Its cheap to hire there, and there's a lot less red-tape!

McCain is a lot more likely to help cut back regulations once the crisis is over, and help restore business confidence in our country, and promote small business growth. And he's DEFINETLY not going to be one to instate socialist programs that are going to cost more much, MUCH more than our country could even dream of affording at this time. And Universal Healthcare certainly isnt going to help business growth, dont forget insurance and hospitals are a business too. Atleast, until the government takes charge. Wanna know what's best for this country? Not obama, that's for damned sure. Certainly, i'd prefer Romney's economic expertise in Office, But McCain will do.

Tolwan

McCain is more likely to die 2 weeks after being sworn in.

He's 72, not 92. He's actually not very likely to die at all. He has no standing medical issues whatsoever. His mother is still alive for crying outloud.... And if that's the only point you can bring up against McCain, then he's in good territory right now.

Close your eye why don't you. I do not wish death on anyone or would want McCain to die but he is ill. He has cancer. Last time I checked that wasn't good. He has about a 1/5 chance of dying in first term. Like I said I do not wish it but lets be realistic here. Do we really want to risk Palin running the country? She will probably say "Kill them all God will recognize his own." Quote from the crusades.

Less MSNBC would do good for you. Its the liberal version of FOX. So is CNN, but its MSNBC Lite. Fact 1: McCain doesnt have cancer. He *Had* cancer. Doctor at his clinic even cleared him with Perfect help and "No possible chance of recurrence of Skin cancer". Google it.

Fact 2: Sarah Palin is not a Zealot. Again, less MSNBC would do you good.