Originally posted by Artman @_@ (from Socialist Worker Online)
They say that the fact that Kerry is only neck-and-neck with Bush today is nothing to worry about, since Bill Clinton and Ronald Reagan were in the same position at similar points in their presidential campaigns and went on to win the White House.
Yet given Bushs catastrophe in Iraq, Kerry should be far ahead. Instead, he is actively shoring up Bushs position by promising to send more troops to Iraq--and refusing to "cut and run."
This is a rather poor analysis of what's going on with Bush, Kerry, and the election.
Do you really think Kerry's standing in the polls has very much at all to do with some analysis by the American public at large that Bush has made Iraq a "catastrophe", followed by the assessment that Kerry's Iraq policies won't be much different, leading to seeing the two candidates as being very the same?
That's off the mark on many levels.
First of all, the American public is just now slowly waking up to the fact that Iraq is a catastrophe. Last time I recall such a poll, public disapproval of Bush's handling of Iraq was somewhere in the 60-70% range. Let's call it around 2/3. But you have to realize that a fair number of that 2/3 are reluctantly disapproving of Bush, they still like Bush for other reasons. Their mindset is going to be more like "Gee, no one's perfect, even the President I guess, but I kinda with Bush had done better with this Iraq thing".
The kind of outrage over Iraq that this writer for the Socialist Worker Online would like to imagine is out there isn't out there in overwhelming numbers. I doubt it ever will be. Percentages will shift, more people will perhaps wake up, but a lot of people would blissfully go on believing Bush could do no wrong even if there were pictures of Bush personally sodomizing prisoners with a broomstick himself.
Some people will go one believing the deliberate confusion created between 9/11 and Saddam and Al Qaeda no matter what. Some will happily accept as justification the never-found WMD, because, after all, you never know when they might show up. Some will fail to see, excuse, or only become mildly irritated at the poor planning and rejection of good advice that lead to the current post-invasion mess.
While it would be good if Kerry could get more people to open the public's eyes to see the depth's of Bush's failure, that's more the job of the media and the public itself to take care of. Do you really think Kerry changing to a "Bail out now!" position on Iraq is the only way to communicate differences between himself and Bush? Do you think that's the only difference that would matter?
I don't really care if Kerry and Bush will end up having to do pretty much the same things to try and fix the Iraq mess. I'd rather have someone new on the job, someone more likely to be able to mend international fences, than the idiot who created the mess in the first place.
But I guess thinking like that isn't fashionably radical enough for you. You've seen one American Imperialist, you've seen 'em all!
And here (PDF version): (I'll add a link to the April PDF when May is released because the current PDF is not archived and the link will break come Friday anyway.) The link above will take you to the current bls monthly report. Eh, here's the link to the current PDF for shits and giggles http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf
First off lets look at the participation rate. This is an important figure because unemployment only accounts for workforce participants, so here goes:
Not in labor force.............................. 74,615 76,025 76,497 74,163 75,631 75,298 75,886 75,900 76,016
Persons who currently want a job.............. 4,373 4,667 4,598 4,462 4,714 4,747 4,746 4,843 4,744
Notice that the seasonally adjusted participation rate since April of 03 has dropped by .5% from 66.4% to 65.9% while the unemployment rate has dropped by .4%. Adding that 5% back into the unemployment, because job market dropouts typically do so because of disenchentment with job opportunities, would increase the overall unemployment rate by a nominal .1% or so.
Also note that the number of people wanting a job has increased. This includes people who are currently employed (the MBA's managing at Taco Bell) but are actively looking for better employment.
Now look at the employment to population ratio... Yep, its gone down too since this time last year.
Wow imagine that if one looks at the numbers instead of the 288,000 (a made up number BTW http://www.nypost.com/business/23936.htm ) one see that job opportunities over the last year are relatively unchanged... Go figure!
Here lets take a peep at another table:
Code:
Not seasonally adjusted Seasonally adjusted
Category
Apr. Mar. Apr. Apr. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr.
2003 2004 2004 2003 2003 2004 2004 2004 2004
CLASS OF WORKER
Agriculture and related industries....... 2,129 2,025 2,220 2,162 2,245 2,163 2,190 2,161 2,245
Part time for economic reasons......... 4,609 4,868 4,411 4,758 4,788 4,714 4,437 4,733 4,574
Slack work or business conditions.... 3,119 3,163 2,745 3,172 3,205 2,996 2,865 3,011 2,819
Could only find part-time work....... 1,233 1,430 1,429 1,255 1,295 1,380 1,347 1,427 1,439
Part time for noneconomic reasons...... 19,785 19,616 19,568 18,933 18,561 18,905 18,900 19,006 19,000
Nonagricultural industries:
Part time for economic reasons......... 4,518 4,750 4,325 4,643 4,727 4,613 4,328 4,622 4,471
Slack work or business conditions.... 3,055 3,081 2,687 3,098 3,144 2,911 2,778 2,927 2,756
Could only find part-time work....... 1,224 1,423 1,419 1,249 1,279 1,399 1,340 1,414 1,431
Part time for noneconomic reasons...... 19,431 19,276 19,263 18,571 18,367 18,636 18,691 18,693 18,664
The number of part-time employees unable to find full-time wok increased over the last year. This group of people is not included into the unemployment figure because someone who works 10 hours/week is still employed though these people may want/need fulltime employment.
Now lets look at the unemployment numbers themselves:
Code:
Not seasonally adjusted Seasonally adjusted
Measure
Apr. Mar. Apr. Apr. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr.
2003 2004 2004 2003 2003 2004 2004 2004 2004
U-1 Persons unemployed 15 weeks or longer, as a percent of
The U-6 catagory is the actual number of people upset with their current job situation. Not the 5.6% we hear on the news now is it? U-6 has gone down by .5% pver the last year I will admit; however, 9.6% of the labor force is unemployed or employed in a manner which does not suit them.
Now, while the number of jobs has increased, and unemployment has gone down the rate at which these events is occuring is in no way spectacular. Bush can't say his admin is stimulating good job growth when almost 10% of the job force is unhappy with their current state of employment. If you notice Bush touts the economic groth but not as much as one would expect. If the job growth numbers were so great then Bush would throw them into as many speeches as he threw AQ into Iraq war speeches preceeding Mar 2003. He can't claim a victory over the economic situation yet because it isn't ther. It wont be there until the U-6 catagory improves substantially.
So, I'll recapitulate: "They are seen as unable to stimulate good job growth not MBA's working as a manager at McD's."
Note the qualifier 'seen'. Many in the current economy 'see' the job market as worse than it may be, but this 'seeing' will not change until U-6 improves.
Enightened Ones- this is directed at you: Like it or not the former admin also blew it.
* They blew it in Somalia
* They blew it with AQ (Clinton could have had him multiple times)
* They blew it with medicare reform (Clinton never tried).
* They blew it with helping to slash intelligence.
* 911 (Clinton and Co had eight years, during which was WTC Vol One and OKC and Kobar Towers and USS Cole).
* They blew the opportunity to quash world terrorist organizations.
* Monica blew it. Taking national attention away from terror, budget, etc.
And the "anybody but Bush" thing? Between PolPot and Bush you'd choose Pol Pot? What an insanely short-sighted and laughable proposition.
8)
When all else fails--Blame Clinton!!!
Well you know what the upcoming election wont have Slick Willie on the Ballot. The upcomming election is an endictment on the encumbent President and his policies to the previous president. Nice strawman BTW.
Does this thread have any direction or is it just a bunch of crying?
Yes it does. It's a reaffirmation that Bush's goose is cooked.
There have been so many negative slip ups by this administration I doubt many believe that Bush will make it to a second term.
To make it past November he'd have to pull several rabbits out of his hat ( not likely ). As they said in " Kill Bill vol. 1 " : " Silly rabbit! Tricks are for kids! ".
Getting Bush out of office would be one of the best things that has happened in the last 50 years ( given that his presence in office had been one of the worst things ever ).
Neo-Cons this is directed at you: Like it or not this admin is in full-blown coverup mode.
* They blew it in Iraq (they don't even know who will be in charge come Jun 30).
* They blew it with AQ (our mission into Iraq was an AQ recruiting commercial--remember the Soviet occupation in Afghanastan and all the foreign figherters).
* They blew it with medicare reform (drug card=big buisiness handout and folks know this).
* They blew it with NCLBA (warranted or not the "underfunding" by the admin has made this act an albatross for the admin).
* 911 (the admins strongest event happens to be a tragedy: the admin resisted the 911 commission and current polls show Kerry catching up if not surpassing on this topic).
* They blew the opportunity to quash world terrorist organizations because of the rush to Iraq.
* They are seen as unwilling or unable to control deficits.
* They are seen as unable to stimulate good job growth not MBA's working as a manager at McD's.
So, let the Shrub keep is momento sidearm--when he's on his way back to Taxas.
Anybody but Bush in 2004!!! McCain in 2008!!!
1. They will have a complete transitional government in charge on June 30th.
2. AQ has been decimated across the globe. 70% of its leadership is gone. Doing nothing would have also increased recruitment.
3. They got medicare passed. The Dems didn't for 40 years. This is one large ass entitlement...one would think the libs would be thrilled.
4. The NCLBA is not underfunded. The dept. of ed. budget has increased 48% since 2001. Federal Title 1 reading program funding has exploded. But by all means...keep repeating this trash.
5. The 9/11 commision is bullshit. It's a fucking waste of time.
6. They have crushed many terror cells. What was done BEFORE Bush? Nothing.
7. Deficits--we'll have to wait and see. Deficits are not always bad.
8. Job growth. Jesus Christ. Job growth is getting back on track.
1. They will have a complete transitional government in charge on June 30th.
2. AQ has been decimated across the globe. 70% of its leadership is gone. Doing nothing would have also increased recruitment.
3. They got medicare passed. The Dems didn't for 40 years. This is one large ass entitlement...one would think the libs would be thrilled.
4. The NCLBA is not underfunded. The dept. of ed. budget has increased 48% since 2001. Federal Title 1 reading program funding has exploded. But by all means...keep repeating this trash.
5. The 9/11 commision is bullshit. It's a fucking waste of time.
6. They have crushed many terror cells. What was done BEFORE Bush? Nothing.
7. Deficits--we'll have to wait and see. Deficits are not always bad.
8. Job growth. Jesus Christ. Job growth is getting back on track.
It's going to be a long four years for you.
You must get your news from Whitehouse press releases.
Here's the real picutre of our economy for example. It's better in some ways but not what I would call stellar :
Consumer confidence Bumpy Growth June 29
Retail sales Rebound slowing June 14
Leading Economic Indicators Bumpy Growth June 17
Manufacturing Activity (ISM) Bumpy Growth June 1
Industrial Production Weak Growth May 14
Jobs Growth Rebounding Growth June 4
Inflation (CPI) Heating up June 15
You still don't get it do you? People aren't buying this anymore. Also they haven't for some time now.
1. They will have a complete transitional government in charge on June 30th.
A puppet government... Kudos.
2. AQ has been decimated across the globe. 70% of its leadership is gone. Doing nothing would have also increased recruitment.
Jesus damn man this is an organization that relied on the fact that central leadership is not important. This organization has expanded, reorganized, and strengthend sice we decided to invade Iraq. Nice F'ing job. Col. David Hackworth and many other career military analysist have said Bush f'ed up the war on AQ.
3. They got medicare passed. The Dems didn't for 40 years. This is one large ass entitlement...one would think the libs would be thrilled.
Its a fucking handout program!!!! Seniors don't want it. Young people don't want to pay for it!!!
4. The NCLBA is not underfunded. The dept. of ed. budget has increased 48% since 2001. Federal Title 1 reading program funding has exploded. But by all means...keep repeating this trash.
Read what I said!!! Oh that's right I qualified it using the word seen. Why is it when something is explained to one pro-Bush the same thing has to be explained to another.
5. The 9/11 commision is bullshit. It's a fucking waste of time.
Hmmmm discovering why is bullshit...
6. They have crushed many terror cells. What was done BEFORE Bush? Nothing.
Name one
7. Deficits--we'll have to wait and see. Deficits are not always bad.
Again, read what I said. Qualifier 'seen'. I know defecits may/maynot be bad but dollars to doughnuts says most of America don't
8. Job growth. Jesus Christ. Job growth is getting back on track.
U-6. People wont accept job growth until U-6 improves. Its like talking to wall. Read the long post above.
2. AQ has been decimated across the globe. 70% of its leadership is gone. Doing nothing would have also increased recruitment.
Jesus damn man this is an organization that relied on the fact that central leadership is not important. This organization has expanded, reorganized, and strengthend sice we decided to invade Iraq. Nice F'ing job. Col. David Hackworth and many other career military analysist have said Bush f'ed up the war on AQ.
It's even worse than that, I think. We've decimated the 2001 leadership. Do we even KNOW who the 2004 leadership is? I heard an analyst talking the other day about this, and he pointed out that the new guys "running" AQ are brash, impulsive and unpredictable. And on top of that, we don't know who they are. And on top of that, we don't know what kinds of patterns they use (AQ and bin Laden typically use multiple attacks on symbolic targets). These guys? Who knows.
faust9: could you email me? I have a question for you (totally unrelated to this discussion). [email protected]
The left and the elite have so much hate for George W Bush and for America!
George Bush is the elite. It's just that the right wing is blinded by their love for him and can't see how silly they are to think he's just a regular guy.
Well it could be the tax raising possibility that has been the republican rhetoric with Kerry. Oregon was hit pretty hard with the recent recession. As far as unemployment goes we're still at the top of the list.
Well it could be the tax raising possibility that has been the republican rhetoric with Kerry. Oregon was hit pretty hard with the recent recession. As far as unemployment goes we're still at the top of the list.
However it still looks like we'll support Kerry.
Yeah. I figured that the economy would pull in Oregon and Washington (and CA and PA and WV and FL and NJ and ....)
Comments
Originally posted by Artman @_@ (from Socialist Worker Online)
They say that the fact that Kerry is only neck-and-neck with Bush today is nothing to worry about, since Bill Clinton and Ronald Reagan were in the same position at similar points in their presidential campaigns and went on to win the White House.
Yet given Bushs catastrophe in Iraq, Kerry should be far ahead. Instead, he is actively shoring up Bushs position by promising to send more troops to Iraq--and refusing to "cut and run."
This is a rather poor analysis of what's going on with Bush, Kerry, and the election.
Do you really think Kerry's standing in the polls has very much at all to do with some analysis by the American public at large that Bush has made Iraq a "catastrophe", followed by the assessment that Kerry's Iraq policies won't be much different, leading to seeing the two candidates as being very the same?
That's off the mark on many levels.
First of all, the American public is just now slowly waking up to the fact that Iraq is a catastrophe. Last time I recall such a poll, public disapproval of Bush's handling of Iraq was somewhere in the 60-70% range. Let's call it around 2/3. But you have to realize that a fair number of that 2/3 are reluctantly disapproving of Bush, they still like Bush for other reasons. Their mindset is going to be more like "Gee, no one's perfect, even the President I guess, but I kinda with Bush had done better with this Iraq thing".
The kind of outrage over Iraq that this writer for the Socialist Worker Online would like to imagine is out there isn't out there in overwhelming numbers. I doubt it ever will be. Percentages will shift, more people will perhaps wake up, but a lot of people would blissfully go on believing Bush could do no wrong even if there were pictures of Bush personally sodomizing prisoners with a broomstick himself.
Some people will go one believing the deliberate confusion created between 9/11 and Saddam and Al Qaeda no matter what. Some will happily accept as justification the never-found WMD, because, after all, you never know when they might show up. Some will fail to see, excuse, or only become mildly irritated at the poor planning and rejection of good advice that lead to the current post-invasion mess.
While it would be good if Kerry could get more people to open the public's eyes to see the depth's of Bush's failure, that's more the job of the media and the public itself to take care of. Do you really think Kerry changing to a "Bail out now!" position on Iraq is the only way to communicate differences between himself and Bush? Do you think that's the only difference that would matter?
I don't really care if Kerry and Bush will end up having to do pretty much the same things to try and fix the Iraq mess. I'd rather have someone new on the job, someone more likely to be able to mend international fences, than the idiot who created the mess in the first place.
But I guess thinking like that isn't fashionably radical enough for you. You've seen one American Imperialist, you've seen 'em all!
Originally posted by Artman @_@
Cheney Office 'Coordinated' Halliburton Deal
Am I the only one who noticed that while CNN ran this story (a full front page spread) that FoxNews doesn't even have mention of it? Bah....
Originally posted by NaplesX
http://quote.bloomberg.com/apps/news...Pys&refer=home
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,121273,00.html
http://www.thestreet.com/markets/the...0162879_3.html
how about what they were saying last month:
http://www.heritage.org/Research/Economy/wm499.cfm
Yeah I guess it is so because you say so.
Really, well lets look at the raw numebers then shall we?
The raw numbers will all come from: ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/news.release/empsit.txt so have fun reading this beast of a report, I know I did!
And here (PDF version): (I'll add a link to the April PDF when May is released because the current PDF is not archived and the link will break come Friday anyway.) The link above will take you to the current bls monthly report. Eh, here's the link to the current PDF for shits and giggles http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf
And here (March): http://www.bls.gov/news.release/arch...t_04022004.pdf
First off lets look at the participation rate. This is an important figure because unemployment only accounts for workforce participants, so here goes:
Not seasonally adjusted Seasonally adjusted (1)
Employment status, sex, and age
Apr. Mar. Apr. Apr. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr.
2003 2004 2004 2003 2003 2004 2004 2004 2004
TOTAL
Civilian noninstitutional population.............. 220,540 222,550 222,757 220,540 222,509 222,161 222,357 222,550 222,757
Civilian labor force............................ 145,925 146,525 146,260 146,377 146,878 146,863 146,471 146,650 146,741
Participation rate........................ 66.2 65.8 65.7 66.4 66.0 66.1 65.9 65.9 65.9
Employed...................................... 137,424 137,691 138,423 137,578 138,479 138,566 138,301 138,298 138,576
Employment-population ratio............... 62.3 61.9 62.1 62.4 62.2 62.4 62.2 62.1 62.2
Unemployed.................................... 8,501 8,834 7,837 8,799 8,398 8,297 8,170 8,352 8,164
Unemployment rate......................... 5.8 6.0 5.4 6.0 5.7 5.6 5.6 5.7 5.6
Not in labor force.............................. 74,615 76,025 76,497 74,163 75,631 75,298 75,886 75,900 76,016
Persons who currently want a job.............. 4,373 4,667 4,598 4,462 4,714 4,747 4,746 4,843 4,744
Notice that the seasonally adjusted participation rate since April of 03 has dropped by .5% from 66.4% to 65.9% while the unemployment rate has dropped by .4%. Adding that 5% back into the unemployment, because job market dropouts typically do so because of disenchentment with job opportunities, would increase the overall unemployment rate by a nominal .1% or so.
Also note that the number of people wanting a job has increased. This includes people who are currently employed (the MBA's managing at Taco Bell) but are actively looking for better employment.
Now look at the employment to population ratio... Yep, its gone down too since this time last year.
Wow imagine that if one looks at the numbers instead of the 288,000 (a made up number BTW http://www.nypost.com/business/23936.htm ) one see that job opportunities over the last year are relatively unchanged... Go figure!
Here lets take a peep at another table:
Not seasonally adjusted Seasonally adjusted
Category
Apr. Mar. Apr. Apr. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr.
2003 2004 2004 2003 2003 2004 2004 2004 2004
CLASS OF WORKER
Agriculture and related industries....... 2,129 2,025 2,220 2,162 2,245 2,163 2,190 2,161 2,245
Wage and salary workers................ 1,182 1,125 1,252 1,203 1,294 1,220 1,246 1,234 1,268
Self-employed workers.................. 933 880 944 925 919 929 912 896 934
Unpaid family workers.................. 15 20 24 (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1)
Nonagricultural industries............... 135,295 135,666 136,203 135,486 136,180 136,306 136,166 136,122 136,384
Wage and salary workers................ 126,031 126,595 126,989 126,180 126,661 126,664 126,572 126,811 127,094
Government........................... 19,760 20,137 20,117 19,589 19,694 19,681 19,497 19,936 19,917
Private industries................... 106,271 106,458 106,872 106,599 107,110 107,019 107,008 106,833 107,142
Private households................. 715 767 727 (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1)
Other industries................... 105,556 105,691 106,145 105,853 106,382 106,204 106,173 106,035 106,377
Self-employed workers.................. 9,161 8,955 9,139 9,184 9,477 9,501 9,498 9,210 9,228
Unpaid family workers.................. 103 116 75 (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1)
PERSONS AT WORK PART TIME (2)
All industries:
Part time for economic reasons......... 4,609 4,868 4,411 4,758 4,788 4,714 4,437 4,733 4,574
Slack work or business conditions.... 3,119 3,163 2,745 3,172 3,205 2,996 2,865 3,011 2,819
Could only find part-time work....... 1,233 1,430 1,429 1,255 1,295 1,380 1,347 1,427 1,439
Part time for noneconomic reasons...... 19,785 19,616 19,568 18,933 18,561 18,905 18,900 19,006 19,000
Nonagricultural industries:
Part time for economic reasons......... 4,518 4,750 4,325 4,643 4,727 4,613 4,328 4,622 4,471
Slack work or business conditions.... 3,055 3,081 2,687 3,098 3,144 2,911 2,778 2,927 2,756
Could only find part-time work....... 1,224 1,423 1,419 1,249 1,279 1,399 1,340 1,414 1,431
Part time for noneconomic reasons...... 19,431 19,276 19,263 18,571 18,367 18,636 18,691 18,693 18,664
The number of part-time employees unable to find full-time wok increased over the last year. This group of people is not included into the unemployment figure because someone who works 10 hours/week is still employed though these people may want/need fulltime employment.
Now lets look at the unemployment numbers themselves:
Not seasonally adjusted Seasonally adjusted
Measure
Apr. Mar. Apr. Apr. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr.
2003 2004 2004 2003 2003 2004 2004 2004 2004
U-1 Persons unemployed 15 weeks or longer, as a percent of
the civilian labor force................................. 2.5 2.6 2.2 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.2 2.3 2.0
U-2 Job losers and persons who completed temporary jobs, as
a percent of the civilian labor force.................... 3.2 3.4 2.9 3.3 3.1 3.0 3.0 3.1 3.0
U-3 Total unemployed, as a percent of the civilian labor
force (official unemployment rate)....................... 5.8 6.0 5.4 6.0 5.7 5.6 5.6 5.7 5.6
U-4 Total unemployed plus discouraged workers, as a percent
of the civilian labor force plus discouraged workers..... 6.1 6.4 5.7 6.3 6.0 5.9 5.9 6.0 5.9
U-5 Total unemployed, plus discouraged workers, plus all
other marginally attached workers, as a percent of the
civilian labor force plus all marginally attached
workers........................................... ....... 6.7 7.1 6.3 6.9 6.7 6.7 6.7 6.7 6.5
U-6 Total unemployed, plus all marginally attached workers,
plus total employed part time for economic reasons, as a
percent of the civilian labor force plus all marginally
attached workers......................................... 9.8 10.4 9.3 10.1 9.9 9.9 9.6 9.9 9.6
The U-6 catagory is the actual number of people upset with their current job situation. Not the 5.6% we hear on the news now is it? U-6 has gone down by .5% pver the last year I will admit; however, 9.6% of the labor force is unemployed or employed in a manner which does not suit them.
Now, while the number of jobs has increased, and unemployment has gone down the rate at which these events is occuring is in no way spectacular. Bush can't say his admin is stimulating good job growth when almost 10% of the job force is unhappy with their current state of employment. If you notice Bush touts the economic groth but not as much as one would expect. If the job growth numbers were so great then Bush would throw them into as many speeches as he threw AQ into Iraq war speeches preceeding Mar 2003. He can't claim a victory over the economic situation yet because it isn't ther. It wont be there until the U-6 catagory improves substantially.
So, I'll recapitulate: "They are seen as unable to stimulate good job growth not MBA's working as a manager at McD's."
Note the qualifier 'seen'. Many in the current economy 'see' the job market as worse than it may be, but this 'seeing' will not change until U-6 improves.
Originally posted by Jubelum
Enightened Ones- this is directed at you: Like it or not the former admin also blew it.
* They blew it in Somalia
* They blew it with AQ (Clinton could have had him multiple times)
* They blew it with medicare reform (Clinton never tried).
* They blew it with helping to slash intelligence.
* 911 (Clinton and Co had eight years, during which was WTC Vol One and OKC and Kobar Towers and USS Cole).
* They blew the opportunity to quash world terrorist organizations.
* Monica blew it. Taking national attention away from terror, budget, etc.
And the "anybody but Bush" thing? Between PolPot and Bush you'd choose Pol Pot? What an insanely short-sighted and laughable proposition.
8)
When all else fails--Blame Clinton!!!
Well you know what the upcoming election wont have Slick Willie on the Ballot. The upcomming election is an endictment on the encumbent President and his policies to the previous president. Nice strawman BTW.
Blame Bill 2004. It's not Bush's fault!!!
Originally posted by rageous
Does this thread have any direction or is it just a bunch of crying?
Yes it does. It's a reaffirmation that Bush's goose is cooked.
There have been so many negative slip ups by this administration I doubt many believe that Bush will make it to a second term.
To make it past November he'd have to pull several rabbits out of his hat ( not likely ). As they said in " Kill Bill vol. 1 " : " Silly rabbit! Tricks are for kids! ".
Getting Bush out of office would be one of the best things that has happened in the last 50 years ( given that his presence in office had been one of the worst things ever ).
OUT THE DOOR IN 2004!
Originally posted by faust9
Neo-Cons this is directed at you: Like it or not this admin is in full-blown coverup mode.
* They blew it in Iraq (they don't even know who will be in charge come Jun 30).
* They blew it with AQ (our mission into Iraq was an AQ recruiting commercial--remember the Soviet occupation in Afghanastan and all the foreign figherters).
* They blew it with medicare reform (drug card=big buisiness handout and folks know this).
* They blew it with NCLBA (warranted or not the "underfunding" by the admin has made this act an albatross for the admin).
* 911 (the admins strongest event happens to be a tragedy: the admin resisted the 911 commission and current polls show Kerry catching up if not surpassing on this topic).
* They blew the opportunity to quash world terrorist organizations because of the rush to Iraq.
* They are seen as unwilling or unable to control deficits.
* They are seen as unable to stimulate good job growth not MBA's working as a manager at McD's.
So, let the Shrub keep is momento sidearm--when he's on his way back to Taxas.
Anybody but Bush in 2004!!! McCain in 2008!!!
1. They will have a complete transitional government in charge on June 30th.
2. AQ has been decimated across the globe. 70% of its leadership is gone. Doing nothing would have also increased recruitment.
3. They got medicare passed. The Dems didn't for 40 years. This is one large ass entitlement...one would think the libs would be thrilled.
4. The NCLBA is not underfunded. The dept. of ed. budget has increased 48% since 2001. Federal Title 1 reading program funding has exploded. But by all means...keep repeating this trash.
5. The 9/11 commision is bullshit. It's a fucking waste of time.
6. They have crushed many terror cells. What was done BEFORE Bush? Nothing.
7. Deficits--we'll have to wait and see. Deficits are not always bad.
8. Job growth. Jesus Christ. Job growth is getting back on track.
It's going to be a long four years for you.
Originally posted by SDW2001
1. They will have a complete transitional government in charge on June 30th.
2. AQ has been decimated across the globe. 70% of its leadership is gone. Doing nothing would have also increased recruitment.
3. They got medicare passed. The Dems didn't for 40 years. This is one large ass entitlement...one would think the libs would be thrilled.
4. The NCLBA is not underfunded. The dept. of ed. budget has increased 48% since 2001. Federal Title 1 reading program funding has exploded. But by all means...keep repeating this trash.
5. The 9/11 commision is bullshit. It's a fucking waste of time.
6. They have crushed many terror cells. What was done BEFORE Bush? Nothing.
7. Deficits--we'll have to wait and see. Deficits are not always bad.
8. Job growth. Jesus Christ. Job growth is getting back on track.
It's going to be a long four years for you.
You must get your news from Whitehouse press releases.
Here's the real picutre of our economy for example. It's better in some ways but not what I would call stellar :
Consumer confidence Bumpy Growth June 29
Retail sales Rebound slowing June 14
Leading Economic Indicators Bumpy Growth June 17
Manufacturing Activity (ISM) Bumpy Growth June 1
Industrial Production Weak Growth May 14
Jobs Growth Rebounding Growth June 4
Inflation (CPI) Heating up June 15
You still don't get it do you? People aren't buying this anymore. Also they haven't for some time now.
Originally posted by segovius
But what exactly do you know about the man apart from that he isn't Bush ? I mean really ?
You've got to stop and realize for most people, the fact that he is NOT Bush is enough. Many people *are* that simple.
A puppet government... Kudos.
2. AQ has been decimated across the globe. 70% of its leadership is gone. Doing nothing would have also increased recruitment.
Jesus damn man this is an organization that relied on the fact that central leadership is not important. This organization has expanded, reorganized, and strengthend sice we decided to invade Iraq. Nice F'ing job. Col. David Hackworth and many other career military analysist have said Bush f'ed up the war on AQ.
3. They got medicare passed. The Dems didn't for 40 years. This is one large ass entitlement...one would think the libs would be thrilled.
Its a fucking handout program!!!! Seniors don't want it. Young people don't want to pay for it!!!
4. The NCLBA is not underfunded. The dept. of ed. budget has increased 48% since 2001. Federal Title 1 reading program funding has exploded. But by all means...keep repeating this trash.
Read what I said!!! Oh that's right I qualified it using the word seen. Why is it when something is explained to one pro-Bush the same thing has to be explained to another.
5. The 9/11 commision is bullshit. It's a fucking waste of time.
Hmmmm discovering why is bullshit...
6. They have crushed many terror cells. What was done BEFORE Bush? Nothing.
Name one
7. Deficits--we'll have to wait and see. Deficits are not always bad.
Again, read what I said. Qualifier 'seen'. I know defecits may/maynot be bad but dollars to doughnuts says most of America don't
8. Job growth. Jesus Christ. Job growth is getting back on track.
U-6. People wont accept job growth until U-6 improves. Its like talking to wall. Read the long post above.
It's going to be a long four years for you.
Originally posted by faust9
2. AQ has been decimated across the globe. 70% of its leadership is gone. Doing nothing would have also increased recruitment.
Jesus damn man this is an organization that relied on the fact that central leadership is not important. This organization has expanded, reorganized, and strengthend sice we decided to invade Iraq. Nice F'ing job. Col. David Hackworth and many other career military analysist have said Bush f'ed up the war on AQ.
It's even worse than that, I think. We've decimated the 2001 leadership. Do we even KNOW who the 2004 leadership is? I heard an analyst talking the other day about this, and he pointed out that the new guys "running" AQ are brash, impulsive and unpredictable. And on top of that, we don't know who they are. And on top of that, we don't know what kinds of patterns they use (AQ and bin Laden typically use multiple attacks on symbolic targets). These guys? Who knows.
faust9: could you email me? I have a question for you (totally unrelated to this discussion). [email protected]
Cheers
Scott
http://www.chronicallybiased.com/ind...temid=295#more
http://www.chronicallybiased.com/index.php?itemid=307
Originally posted by Common Man
The left and the elite have so much hate for George W Bush and for America!
George Bush is the elite. It's just that the right wing is blinded by their love for him and can't see how silly they are to think he's just a regular guy.
Originally posted by Common Man
The left and the elite have so much hate for George W Bush and for America!
Originally posted by segovius
You'll be begging Bush to come back on bended knees whilst crying tears of pain after 2 years of Kerry....I can promise you that.
Bush was one of the worst thing ever, for sure. Doesn't mean something worse couldn't be in the post.
But what exactly do you know about the man apart from that he isn't Bush ? I mean really ?
What do I need to know?
When you've hit the bottom of the barrel the chouce is relatively simple.
I don't know too much about Kerry really.
As none of us really do.
I do know he has the only chance of defeating Bush and so far I haven't heard anything too bad.
The sad fact is that whoever follows Bush will probably be doing damage control for 4 years.
Things are that bad.
This may mean doing things that are unpopular like raising taxes to pay for Bush's mistakes.
OUT THE DOOR IN 2004!
Originally posted by midwinter
jimmac, you'd better get out the vote in Nov. Latest polls I've seen have Kerry *narrowly* winning Oregon.
So where did you get this? He was just in Portland and was so popular and so well received he's coming back.
By the way Oregon usually votes Democrat.
http://www.kgw.com/news-local/storie...1fae5d2fd.html
http://www.kgw.com/news-local/storie...1fafa20ec.html
Originally posted by jimmac
So where did you get this? He was just in Portland and was so popular and so well received he's coming back.
Electoral-vote.com and (ugh) here.
Originally posted by midwinter
Electoral-vote.com and (ugh) here.
Well it could be the tax raising possibility that has been the republican rhetoric with Kerry. Oregon was hit pretty hard with the recent recession. As far as unemployment goes we're still at the top of the list.
However it still looks like we'll support Kerry.
Originally posted by jimmac
Well it could be the tax raising possibility that has been the republican rhetoric with Kerry. Oregon was hit pretty hard with the recent recession. As far as unemployment goes we're still at the top of the list.
However it still looks like we'll support Kerry.
Yeah. I figured that the economy would pull in Oregon and Washington (and CA and PA and WV and FL and NJ and ....)
Heh.
Cheers
Scott