Why can't conservatives/GOP learn from history?

[bedowin62]

i gave that idiot left-wing idiot about 10 examples of policies the right was on the "correct side on in history" yesterday

he cowardly deflected

 

[bedowin62]

Correll; that loser cant be taken seriously. He actually tried to say the Clinton years were exempt from his "35 years of failed supply-side economics" based soley on the fact Clinton raised taxes.

never mind Clinton LOWERED CAPITAL GAINS TAXES, which even this left-wing loser admits is how the richest make their money
nevermind Clinton REDUCED WELFARE WHILE OBAMA HAS EXPANDED IT
nevermind Clinton made all kinds of deals with any carbon-based fuel producer on the planet

libs are losers who lie to themselves

 

[bedowin62]

obama lost 5-8% of his Black support in his re-election; along with a reduced support from other key groups that he had the first time

libs are losers who lie to themselves

More projection from the low info right wing. Shocking

is it accurate or not leftard? that's all i really want to know. it's a yes or no question. Thanks in advance!! lol

 

[Correll]

Correll; that loser cant be taken seriously. He actually tried to say the Clinton years were exempt from his "35 years of failed supply-side economics" based soley on the fact Clinton raised taxes.

never mind Clinton LOWERED CAPITAL GAINS TAXES, which even this left-wing loser admits is how the richest make their money
nevermind Clinton REDUCED WELFARE WHILE OBAMA HAS EXPANDED IT
nevermind Clinton made all kinds of deals with any carbon-based fuel producer on the planet

libs are losers who lie to themselves

Yeah, I caught that.

 

[bedowin62]

You did not address the fact that much of that job loss occurred under Clinton.

That was dishonest of you.

You mean BJ Bill's 22+ million jobs created was really job losses? Talk about being totally screwed up Bubba!




Yes, Clinton was the best Conservative Prez since Ike, YES BJ Bill got Ronnie's NAFTA passed. Yes 60% of Dems in Congress voted against NAFTA AND every other "free trade" agreement.

HONEST ENOUGH DUMMY?

.


arent you the idiot that says the fact that Clinton hiked taxes means "trickle-down" wasnt in effect on h is watch?

now you're saying he was a conservative?

contradicting yourself again

idiot

weird how tiny your brain is Bubba. Seriously...

Everyone noticed that you had no answer to his claim.

You aren't fooling anyone.

Got it Bubba, you didn't understand the false premise!

Without false premises,m distortions and lies, what would right wingersd EVER have?

PLEASE since you want to be the "grownup" in the debate, PRETTY PLEASE give me just ONE policy conservatives have EVER gotten on the correct side of US history on ANY policy? Just one example PLEASE?


Thanks Bubba

it isnt a "false premise" you clearly made that point yesterday. when asked about it you deflected chump.

you can clear up an misconceptions RIGHT NOW OK? just by answering the question: Were the fabulously successful clinton years "supply-side" economics or "trickle-down" or not? if they were there goes your theory. if they werent what do you call those years? and if you're saying they werent then what makes you say that?

 

[bedowin62]

he's off fetching more graphs from george soros. that's what he does when cornered with his own rabidly partisan bullshit, just goes and gets more rabidly parrtisan bullshit

 

[bedowin62]

and did you notice the other socialist loser danielpalos also slinked away when he attempted to back up the other left-wingnut, when i asked him to clarify something

 

[danielpalos]

the Clinton years: supply-side economics

libs are losers who lie to themselves

the lowest unemployment rate in relatively modern times was supplying labor with employment.

(this ought to be good)

how was "labor" supplied with employment exactly

the lowest unemployment rate in relatively modern times was supplying labor with employment.

economic policies that enabled some of the People to generate a profit for the (other) People.

 

[Dad2three]

the Clinton years: supply-side economics

libs are losers who lie to themselves

FLASHBACK: In 1993, GOP Warned That Clinton’s Tax Plan Would ‘Kill Jobs,’ ‘Kill The Current Recovery’


The Bush tax cuts of 2001 and 2003 are scheduled to expire at the end of the year, and President Obama, just as he did on the campaign trail, has proposed renewing the cuts for all but those in the highest two income tax brackets, allowing tax rates for the wealthiest two percent of Americans to reset to the rate at which they were under President Clinton.

Republicans, however, want to renew all of the cuts, and have been apoplectic about Obama’s plan, claiming that it will kill jobs and cripple small businesses. “This is about stopping a job-killing tax hike on small businesses during tough economic times,” said Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT). “You can’t raise taxes in the middle of a weak economy without risking a double dip in the recession,” said House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH).



...Here is just some of the rhetoric employed by Republicans in 1993 to fearmonger about Clinton’s tax increases (there’s more below the fold):




Rep. Newt Gingrich (R-GA), February 2, 1993: We have all too many people in the Democratic administration who are talking about bigger Government, bigger bureaucracy, more programs, and higher taxes. I believe that that will in fact kill the current recovery and put us back in a recession. It might take 1 1/2 or 2 years, but it will happen. (Congressional Record, 1993, Thomas)

Rep. Bill Archer (R-TX), May 24, 1993: I would much rather be here today supporting the President and I would do so if his proposals could expect to increase jobs and the standard of living for Americans, but I believe his massive tax increases will do just the opposite. (Congressional Record, 1993, Thomas)

Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-GA), July 13, 1993: Small businesses generate the bulk of this Nation’s new jobs. And they will be the hardest hit by the Clinton tax-and-spend budget. Because, when you raise taxes, you kill jobs. (Congressional Record, 1993, Thomas)

Rep. Christopher Cox (R-CA), May, 27, 1993: This is really the Dr. Kevorkian plan for our economy. It will kill jobs, kill businesses, and yes, kill even the higher tax revenues that these suicidal tax increasers hope to gain. (Congressional Record, 1993, Page: H2949)


FLASHBACK: In 1993, GOP Warned That Clinton’s Tax Plan Would ‘Kill Jobs,’ ‘Kill The Current Recovery’


SURE BUBBA, SURE

 

[Dad2three]

You mean BJ Bill's 22+ million jobs created was really job losses? Talk about being totally screwed up Bubba!




Yes, Clinton was the best Conservative Prez since Ike, YES BJ Bill got Ronnie's NAFTA passed. Yes 60% of Dems in Congress voted against NAFTA AND every other "free trade" agreement.

HONEST ENOUGH DUMMY?

.


arent you the idiot that says the fact that Clinton hiked taxes means "trickle-down" wasnt in effect on h is watch?

now you're saying he was a conservative?

contradicting yourself again

idiot

weird how tiny your brain is Bubba. Seriously...

Everyone noticed that you had no answer to his claim.

You aren't fooling anyone.

Got it Bubba, you didn't understand the false premise!

Without false premises,m distortions and lies, what would right wingersd EVER have?

PLEASE since you want to be the "grownup" in the debate, PRETTY PLEASE give me just ONE policy conservatives have EVER gotten on the correct side of US history on ANY policy? Just one example PLEASE?


Thanks Bubba

There is no "false premise". The process of job outsourcing, especially manufacturing, continued unabated during the Clinton years, despite the overall economic upturn.

YOur inability to be honest about this reveals you to be nothing but a partisan hack.

NOt that your general demeanor left any doubt about that.

Sure Bubba, sure

Reviving American Manufacturing

I guess you will NOT accept the challenge of giving me ONE POLICY conservatives have EVER been on the correct side of history? I'm shocked, lol

 

[bedowin62]

the Clinton years: supply-side economics

libs are losers who lie to themselves

FLASHBACK: In 1993, GOP Warned That Clinton’s Tax Plan Would ‘Kill Jobs,’ ‘Kill The Current Recovery’


The Bush tax cuts of 2001 and 2003 are scheduled to expire at the end of the year, and President Obama, just as he did on the campaign trail, has proposed renewing the cuts for all but those in the highest two income tax brackets, allowing tax rates for the wealthiest two percent of Americans to reset to the rate at which they were under President Clinton.

Republicans, however, want to renew all of the cuts, and have been apoplectic about Obama’s plan, claiming that it will kill jobs and cripple small businesses. “This is about stopping a job-killing tax hike on small businesses during tough economic times,” said Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT). “You can’t raise taxes in the middle of a weak economy without risking a double dip in the recession,” said House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH).



...Here is just some of the rhetoric employed by Republicans in 1993 to fearmonger about Clinton’s tax increases (there’s more below the fold):




Rep. Newt Gingrich (R-GA), February 2, 1993: We have all too many people in the Democratic administration who are talking about bigger Government, bigger bureaucracy, more programs, and higher taxes. I believe that that will in fact kill the current recovery and put us back in a recession. It might take 1 1/2 or 2 years, but it will happen. (Congressional Record, 1993, Thomas)

Rep. Bill Archer (R-TX), May 24, 1993: I would much rather be here today supporting the President and I would do so if his proposals could expect to increase jobs and the standard of living for Americans, but I believe his massive tax increases will do just the opposite. (Congressional Record, 1993, Thomas)

Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-GA), July 13, 1993: Small businesses generate the bulk of this Nation’s new jobs. And they will be the hardest hit by the Clinton tax-and-spend budget. Because, when you raise taxes, you kill jobs. (Congressional Record, 1993, Thomas)

Rep. Christopher Cox (R-CA), May, 27, 1993: This is really the Dr. Kevorkian plan for our economy. It will kill jobs, kill businesses, and yes, kill even the higher tax revenues that these suicidal tax increasers hope to gain. (Congressional Record, 1993, Page: H2949)


FLASHBACK: In 1993, GOP Warned That Clinton’s Tax Plan Would ‘Kill Jobs,’ ‘Kill The Current Recovery’


SURE BUBBA, SURE

WTF??

now you are trying to back up your claims based on the statements of the Republicans you dismiss at every turn?

i'm embarrassed FOR you

 

[bedowin62]

the Clinton years: supply-side economics

libs are losers who lie to themselves

FLASHBACK: In 1993, GOP Warned That Clinton’s Tax Plan Would ‘Kill Jobs,’ ‘Kill The Current Recovery’


The Bush tax cuts of 2001 and 2003 are scheduled to expire at the end of the year, and President Obama, just as he did on the campaign trail, has proposed renewing the cuts for all but those in the highest two income tax brackets, allowing tax rates for the wealthiest two percent of Americans to reset to the rate at which they were under President Clinton.

Republicans, however, want to renew all of the cuts, and have been apoplectic about Obama’s plan, claiming that it will kill jobs and cripple small businesses. “This is about stopping a job-killing tax hike on small businesses during tough economic times,” said Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT). “You can’t raise taxes in the middle of a weak economy without risking a double dip in the recession,” said House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH).



...Here is just some of the rhetoric employed by Republicans in 1993 to fearmonger about Clinton’s tax increases (there’s more below the fold):




Rep. Newt Gingrich (R-GA), February 2, 1993: We have all too many people in the Democratic administration who are talking about bigger Government, bigger bureaucracy, more programs, and higher taxes. I believe that that will in fact kill the current recovery and put us back in a recession. It might take 1 1/2 or 2 years, but it will happen. (Congressional Record, 1993, Thomas)

Rep. Bill Archer (R-TX), May 24, 1993: I would much rather be here today supporting the President and I would do so if his proposals could expect to increase jobs and the standard of living for Americans, but I believe his massive tax increases will do just the opposite. (Congressional Record, 1993, Thomas)

Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-GA), July 13, 1993: Small businesses generate the bulk of this Nation’s new jobs. And they will be the hardest hit by the Clinton tax-and-spend budget. Because, when you raise taxes, you kill jobs. (Congressional Record, 1993, Thomas)

Rep. Christopher Cox (R-CA), May, 27, 1993: This is really the Dr. Kevorkian plan for our economy. It will kill jobs, kill businesses, and yes, kill even the higher tax revenues that these suicidal tax increasers hope to gain. (Congressional Record, 1993, Page: H2949)


FLASHBACK: In 1993, GOP Warned That Clinton’s Tax Plan Would ‘Kill Jobs,’ ‘Kill The Current Recovery’


SURE BUBBA, SURE

how does any of this back up your claim that the Clinton years werent an example of supply-side economics?? because Republicans said so??

 

[Dad2three]

You mean BJ Bill's 22+ million jobs created was really job losses? Talk about being totally screwed up Bubba!




Yes, Clinton was the best Conservative Prez since Ike, YES BJ Bill got Ronnie's NAFTA passed. Yes 60% of Dems in Congress voted against NAFTA AND every other "free trade" agreement.

HONEST ENOUGH DUMMY?

Nope.

For your initial post you were obviously referring to manufacturing jobs, which are the best jobs for upward mobility from working poor to middle class, or even higher.

THe fact that Clinton was lucky enough to come into office at the beginning of an economic upswing does not change the fact that the outsourcing of manufacturing continued unabated though out his administration.

You know, I have readily admitted to Republican blame when it comes to this issue. Your dishonest defense of Clinton makes it seem that your interest here is not the topic, but nothing but a partisan smear.

And what is with the moronic "bubba" repetition?

Got it. Clinton had 22+ million new jobs, increasing wealth at almost all areas, but my defending Clinton on NAFTA, which 60% of Dems in Congress voted against, and me calling Clinton the best conservative Prez since Ike, make me" dishonest defense of Clinton" the issue. No fukkn critical thinking or honesty required to be a conservative today

BTW, Yeah it was luck, not his GOOD GOV'T POLICY (like vetoing the GOP's $700+ billion tax cut after HIS first balanced budget.

...cs

Yes. Clinton was lucky enough to take office in the beginning of an economic upturn.

That does not change the fact the long standing Free Trade Policies and Globalization were still taking effect moving manufacturing jobs out of the country despite the overall job growth.

YOur reference to Clinton as the "best conservative Prez" is irrelevant spin.

Yes, the dems in congress did try to mostly vote against NAFTA, but the democratic President signed it, not vetoed it.

Reviving American Manufacturing

Wow. THat'sa great graph.

I love the way it makes no distinction between one term presidents and two term presidents.


Who is Bill Foster and why should I trust his numbers?

Differentiate 1 term and 2? lol

Note the red (GOPers versus blue (Dems)? Hmm wonder if theior ideology like Gov't policy matters?




So NO, you can't refute his numbers *from BLS). Thanks anyways Bubba

 

[bedowin62]

arent you forgetting about something leftard?

the DOT-COM REVOLUTION.

supply-side

 

[Dad2three]

You mean BJ Bill's 22+ million jobs created was really job losses? Talk about being totally screwed up Bubba!




Yes, Clinton was the best Conservative Prez since Ike, YES BJ Bill got Ronnie's NAFTA passed. Yes 60% of Dems in Congress voted against NAFTA AND every other "free trade" agreement.

HONEST ENOUGH DUMMY?

Nope.

For your initial post you were obviously referring to manufacturing jobs, which are the best jobs for upward mobility from working poor to middle class, or even higher.

THe fact that Clinton was lucky enough to come into office at the beginning of an economic upswing does not change the fact that the outsourcing of manufacturing continued unabated though out his administration.

You know, I have readily admitted to Republican blame when it comes to this issue. Your dishonest defense of Clinton makes it seem that your interest here is not the topic, but nothing but a partisan smear.

And what is with the moronic "bubba" repetition?

Got it. Clinton had 22+ million new jobs, increasing wealth at almost all areas, but my defending Clinton on NAFTA, which 60% of Dems in Congress voted against, and me calling Clinton the best conservative Prez since Ike, make me" dishonest defense of Clinton" the issue. No fukkn critical thinking or honesty required to be a conservative today

BTW, Yeah it was luck, not his GOOD GOV'T POLICY (like vetoing the GOP's $700+ billion tax cut after HIS first balanced budget.

...cs

Yes. Clinton was lucky enough to take office in the beginning of an economic upturn.

That does not change the fact the long standing Free Trade Policies and Globalization were still taking effect moving manufacturing jobs out of the country despite the overall job growth.

YOur reference to Clinton as the "best conservative Prez" is irrelevant spin.

Yes, the dems in congress did try to mostly vote against NAFTA, but the democratic President signed it, not vetoed it.

Reviving American Manufacturing

RE: YOUR GRAPH DULLARD LIB:

"change in" only reflects just that, a change. Since most of the Bush years were WAY BETTER THAN THE OBAMA YEARS, until the economy tanked at the end; a chart WOULD show a "change in"

FACT: obama will never have Bush's low 5.2% average unemployment

Avg? Oh right Dubya took a 4% inherited unemployment rate, cheered on a Banksters ponzi scheme, and ended with an unemployment rate of 7.8% (AND TRENDING UP) but you want an average? lol

 

[Dad2three]

obama lost MILLIONS OF JOBS over and above what was lost under Bush; before things started to get better. and they started to get better when there more Republicans elected to Congress

Yep, Dubya lost 10 million jobs his last couple years, Obama lost 4 million his first 9 months of inheriting Dubya's economy. But electing Repugs got the economy going again? lol. PLEASE give me bills they passed that did it? lol

 

[Correll]

the Clinton years: supply-side economics

libs are losers who lie to themselves

FLASHBACK: In 1993, GOP Warned That Clinton’s Tax Plan Would ‘Kill Jobs,’ ‘Kill The Current Recovery’


The Bush tax cuts of 2001 and 2003 are scheduled to expire at the end of the year, and President Obama, just as he did on the campaign trail, has proposed renewing the cuts for all but those in the highest two income tax brackets, allowing tax rates for the wealthiest two percent of Americans to reset to the rate at which they were under President Clinton.

Republicans, however, want to renew all of the cuts, and have been apoplectic about Obama’s plan, claiming that it will kill jobs and cripple small businesses. “This is about stopping a job-killing tax hike on small businesses during tough economic times,” said Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT). “You can’t raise taxes in the middle of a weak economy without risking a double dip in the recession,” said House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH).



...Here is just some of the rhetoric employed by Republicans in 1993 to fearmonger about Clinton’s tax increases (there’s more below the fold):




Rep. Newt Gingrich (R-GA), February 2, 1993: We have all too many people in the Democratic administration who are talking about bigger Government, bigger bureaucracy, more programs, and higher taxes. I believe that that will in fact kill the current recovery and put us back in a recession. It might take 1 1/2 or 2 years, but it will happen. (Congressional Record, 1993, Thomas)

Rep. Bill Archer (R-TX), May 24, 1993: I would much rather be here today supporting the President and I would do so if his proposals could expect to increase jobs and the standard of living for Americans, but I believe his massive tax increases will do just the opposite. (Congressional Record, 1993, Thomas)

Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-GA), July 13, 1993: Small businesses generate the bulk of this Nation’s new jobs. And they will be the hardest hit by the Clinton tax-and-spend budget. Because, when you raise taxes, you kill jobs. (Congressional Record, 1993, Thomas)

Rep. Christopher Cox (R-CA), May, 27, 1993: This is really the Dr. Kevorkian plan for our economy. It will kill jobs, kill businesses, and yes, kill even the higher tax revenues that these suicidal tax increasers hope to gain. (Congressional Record, 1993, Page: H2949)


FLASHBACK: In 1993, GOP Warned That Clinton’s Tax Plan Would ‘Kill Jobs,’ ‘Kill The Current Recovery’


SURE BUBBA, SURE

Nope.

For your initial post you were obviously referring to manufacturing jobs, which are the best jobs for upward mobility from working poor to middle class, or even higher.

THe fact that Clinton was lucky enough to come into office at the beginning of an economic upswing does not change the fact that the outsourcing of manufacturing continued unabated though out his administration.

You know, I have readily admitted to Republican blame when it comes to this issue. Your dishonest defense of Clinton makes it seem that your interest here is not the topic, but nothing but a partisan smear.

And what is with the moronic "bubba" repetition?

Got it. Clinton had 22+ million new jobs, increasing wealth at almost all areas, but my defending Clinton on NAFTA, which 60% of Dems in Congress voted against, and me calling Clinton the best conservative Prez since Ike, make me" dishonest defense of Clinton" the issue. No fukkn critical thinking or honesty required to be a conservative today

BTW, Yeah it was luck, not his GOOD GOV'T POLICY (like vetoing the GOP's $700+ billion tax cut after HIS first balanced budget.

...cs

Yes. Clinton was lucky enough to take office in the beginning of an economic upturn.

That does not change the fact the long standing Free Trade Policies and Globalization were still taking effect moving manufacturing jobs out of the country despite the overall job growth.

YOur reference to Clinton as the "best conservative Prez" is irrelevant spin.

Yes, the dems in congress did try to mostly vote against NAFTA, but the democratic President signed it, not vetoed it.

Reviving American Manufacturing

Wow. THat'sa great graph.

I love the way it makes no distinction between one term presidents and two term presidents.


Who is Bill Foster and why should I trust his numbers?

Differentiate 1 term and 2? lol

Note the red (GOPers versus blue (Dems)? Hmm wonder if theior ideology like Gov't policy matters?




So NO, you can't refute his numbers *from BLS). Thanks anyways Bubba

You know bedowin is crushing you so badly, i don't feel there is much for me to do here.

 

[bedowin62]

you're trying to defend your position based on the statements of people you insist havent been on the right side of ANYTHING "IN HISTORY"??

GOT IT, THANKS

dismissed

 

[Dad2three]

i gave that idiot left-wing idiot about 10 examples of policies the right was on the "correct side on in history" yesterday

he cowardly deflected

BZZZ nope, sorry Bubba, conflating party with ideology when parties have switched several times the past 150 years, doesn't cut it!
Hint YES, you listed PROGRESSIVES giving blacks the right to vote and OTHER progressive ideas. Conservatives? They fought it, mostly the CONservative CONfederate States ofAmeriKKKa, today's GOP base!

 

[bedowin62]

obama lost MILLIONS OF JOBS over and above what was lost under Bush; before things started to get better. and they started to get better when there more Republicans elected to Congress

Yep, Dubya lost 10 million jobs his last couple years, Obama lost 4 million his first 9 months of inheriting Dubya's economy. But electing Repugs got the economy going again? lol. PLEASE give me bills they passed that did it? lol

i can give you the bills obama passed that were Republican bills; like THE BUSH TAX CUTS; ALL OF THEM, IDIOT, EVEN FOR THE HIGHEST BRACKETS. OBAMA EXTENDED THEM, even though he still had Dem majorities in BOTH chambers of Congress. then he made 98% OF THEM PERMANENT

thanks for playing though idiot