• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Mrs. Bill Clinton blatherings

how about this one, instead of picking one that is slanted misleadingly

LNS14000000_101941_1139535439141.gif
http://data.bls.gov/PDQ/graphics/LNS14000000_101941_1139535439141.gif
 
DeeJayH said:
how about this one, instead of picking one that is slanted misleadingly
Slanted misleadingly? How? What the hell are you talking about? Especially since I specified "the end of Clintonian era figures". :roll:
 
shuamort said:
Slanted misleadingly? How? What the hell are you talking about? Especially since I specified "the end of Clintonian era figures". :roll:

your disclosure was nice, but the proof of the slant you tried to use is right before your eyes in the graph i posted
and while it does show well for Clinton in that he inherited the high end of the unemployment, Barney Fife could have been president during the dotcom boom and done just as well.
 
Unfortunately, if you are unemployed, your personal unemployment rate is 100%.

LNS14000000_102059_1139535953128.gif
\

Lets look back further for more history. On a longer-term historical basis, the unemployment rate right now is currently looking reasonably good. We sure had a good run thru the middle and latter half of the '90s, though it is debatable exactly how much credit any politician(s) can or should take credit for it - but of course, they will. Thats what policitians do: extrapolate from recent successes and blame others for failures.

The fact is that the economies of the world (not just ours) operate with such lagged effects that a critical analysis will often suggest that one administration's successes are due to a previous administrations efforts, and not necessarily the efforts of the immediately preceding administration.

Some economists are convinced that actions by governments to moderate or influence the business cycle are doomed to failure and inevitably and ultimately, only make matters worse. That will never keep them from trying, though.
 
Stinger said:
Some are and some aren't, Hertz, Sears and a few smaller ones have centers here in our city. They provide good jobs for mothers who want to work part-time or students. That being said I find this mostly in computer tech support, of course there are a lot of people in the foreign countries who are getting better educations in those fields than here. But I have been known to send an email message to a company when I did find myself talking to someone in another country and I had difficulty communicating with them. This happened with Delta airlines, they wrote me back telling me they sent their contractors through "accent neutralization courses":doh

I constantly have a difficult time talking to my ISP reps, and reps from the holder of my Mastercard. They are prone to repeat the same information over and over, even though I've asked them a question differnt from what they're saying. I've finally decided that if I have a technical problem with my computer, I'm going to blow it up. The Mastercard, I'll just cut up. Nothing like talking to someone and all you're doing is this.... :2brickwal
 
DeeJayH said:
your disclosure was nice, but the proof of the slant you tried to use is right before your eyes in the graph i posted
and while it does show well for Clinton in that he inherited the high end of the unemployment, Barney Fife could have been president during the dotcom boom and done just as well.
Umm, the data is exactly the same except mine shows the end of the Clinton era presidency.. actually, the last 4 years... your graph further proves my point by showing a long history of decreasing unemployment. So before you go tooting your victory, realize that your point doesn't even make any sense and you haven't shown how the numbers would be slanted in "my" favor.
 
shuamort said:
Umm, the data is exactly the same except mine shows the end of the Clinton era presidency.. actually, the last 4 years... your graph further proves my point by showing a long history of decreasing unemployment. So before you go tooting your victory, realize that your point doesn't even make any sense and you haven't shown how the numbers would be slanted in "my" favor.

the slant i see, whether it was intentional or not, was that Bush had a higher Unemployment rate as compared to Clinton in the graph you posted
the other graphs posted show how well Bush has handled things and that all the ******* and moaning about unemployment is nothing but Bunk
 
DeeJayH said:
the slant i see, whether it was intentional or not, was that Bush had a higher Unemployment rate as compared to Clinton in the graph you posted
They were both from the same source and showed the exact same data for the same time periods. There is no difference except mine was over 10 years and yours was a couple years more.
DeeJayH said:
the other graphs posted show how well Bush has handled things and that all the ******* and moaning about unemployment is nothing but Bunk
None of the graphs show what Bush did. They just show what has happened in those time frames as you pointed out with the dotcom influx that happened under Clinton. No more than Bush can be directly blamed for the economy after 9/11, Clinton be no more directly praised for the internet explosion on the stock market.
 
shuamort said:
Well, it sure doesn't look like MR. LAURA BUSH has brought the economy back to the end of Clintonian era figures:
LNS14000000_101792_1139534848410.gif

Darn close, we had a budget surplus last month and starting in February through mid-April revenues really start coming in as people make income tax payments. By the way the Presidents legal name is not Mr. Laura Bush so why do you use it? Although it would be an honor to be married to such a lovely devoted wife who has honored her husband and marriage throughout.

BTW why didn't you go back the Clintons first year since you posted Bushs, here is the complete graph

LNS14000000_123297_1139622237787.gif
What it shows is that unemployment was falling, Clintons tax increase kicked in and the nearly stopped falling, the Republican tax cuts he opposed kicked in and they fell dramatically. Bush came in on a rising trend, his tax cuts kicked in, a minor delay as we had 9/11 and now they are on a steady downtrend. We are just about at full employment now so what is your complaint?
 
In regards to the OP, this is probably what Mrs. Clinton was talking about:

Ford Motor CEO, Bill Ford, Jr. announced in Thailand during a visit in late October 2005 that Ford plans to further target Asia for expansion and growth over the coming years. He further noted that Thailand will become a central base for Ford’s Asia production

http://www.business-in-asia.com/ford_thailand.htm

As many Japanese and U.S. car manufacturers have selected Thailand as their base for car production in Asia,

http://www.business-in-asia.com/automotive/interview_engineer.htm

GM'S new plant in Thailand is cranking out Opel Zafiras -- and setting the stage for other "common footprint" plants to come.

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m3012/is_9_180/ai_65352732
 
Stinger said:
Darn close, we had a budget surplus last month and starting in February through mid-April revenues really start coming in as people make income tax payments.
A whole one? Wow. Good thing there aren't other HUGE FINANCIAL PROBLEMS this admin has dug us into. Wait a minute. The spending has been outta control. So much for that.

Stinger said:
By the way the Presidents legal name is not Mr. Laura Bush so why do you use it?
Aww, did my retarded jab bother you? Awww, poor stinger. Please let us know when you think your jabs are witty and anything else is not acceptable. Take the point and learn from it.
Stinger said:
Although it would be an honor to be married to such a lovely devoted wife who has honored her husband and marriage throughout.
Seems like Hillary HAS honored her husband and marriage. Most folk like Ronald Reagan or Tim Hutchinson or Newt Gingrich feel divorce is ok. Go figure. But if it's this game you wanna play, I've got a lot more.

Stinger said:
BTW why didn't you go back the Clintons first year since you posted Bushs, here is the complete graph

LNS14000000_123297_1139622237787.gif
What it shows is that unemployment was falling, Clintons tax increase kicked in and the nearly stopped falling, the Republican tax cuts he opposed kicked in and they fell dramatically. Bush came in on a rising trend, his tax cuts kicked in, a minor delay as we had 9/11 and now they are on a steady downtrend. We are just about at full employment now so what is your complaint?
Bush came in and the rising trend STARTED. Hmm. seems like it plateaued at Clinton in the last months, come January when Mr Laura Bush is inaugurated and it starts going up. Hmm....
 
Trajan Octavian Titus said:
That's exactly right people don't understand that the foriegn companies are built here in America so the jobs aren't being outsourced the jobs still go to the American workers.
Lol, where do you think the profit margins are going? lol, not here in the US I can gaurentee you that.
 
jfuh said:
Lol, where do you think the profit margins are going? lol, not here in the US I can gaurentee you that.

Some are reinvested here, some elsewhere and then leftovers paid to the stockholders, you DO know YOU can invest in the Japanese stock market. And where are the GM and Ford profit margins going? Oh that's right they don't have any.
 
Stinger said:
Some are reinvested here, some elsewhere and then leftovers paid to the stockholders, you DO know YOU can invest in the Japanese stock market. And where are the GM and Ford profit margins going? Oh that's right they don't have any.
:spin: :spin: When have I mentioned anything about GM or Ford or advocated about them? I've only pointed out the obvious that these are foreign companies. However if you have no problem with the US employed by forieng companies and do not see the obvious problems associated with such a situation. then there's not much to say about it.

Your points assume that I am arrogant of the situations regarding investments in stocks. I'm sure you should've learned by now to never assume anything about a poster unless it is absolutely obvious.
 
jfuh said:
:spin: :spin: When have I mentioned anything about GM or Ford or advocated about them?

You didn't, I was pointing out the obvious.

I've only pointed out the obvious that these are foreign companies.

As opposed to GM and Ford who are domestic and haven't had any profits to leave here for quite awhile although I do believe their European divisions are doing better.

However if you have no problem with the US employed by forieng companies and do not see the obvious problems associated with such a situation. then there's not much to say about it.

Hyundai and Nissan are two of my biggest customers along with many of the Tier 1 suppliers many of whom are foriegn owned. Many of their employees whom I deal with regularly worked for American owned companies before, they don't have any problems, our company doesn't have any problems, perhaps you could be more specific as to what you think the problems are.

Your points assume that I am arrogant of the situations regarding investments in stocks. I'm sure you should've learned by now to never assume anything about a poster unless it is absolutely obvious.

"Arrogant" of them, no I don't think you are arrogant of them. But if you invest in them the profits you make come back here and YOU, the red blooded American you are can profit. Anyway the ownership is not so important it's where they are where thier suppliers are. All those employees making all that money spending right here in the good ole USA is pretty good for the economy too. All us suppliers and all our employees right here in the USA too. It's a global economy. I work for a German company, have for over 20 years, we manufacture here too and employee alot of people and purchase goods from suppliers right here too.

Anyway the auto industry is doing just fine right here.
 
Kelzie said:
In regards to the OP, this is probably what Mrs. Clinton was talking about:

>> Speaking to an enthusiastic Democratic crowd that increasingly sees jobs moving overseas, Clinton said Thailand should not be granted access to the U.S. auto market.

I think she was clear in what she said.

And the articles are talking about vehicles for the Asian market not here. The Opel built by GM has been produce in Europe for decades but hasn't been brought here for about as long. Mrs. Bill Clinton was trying to make political hay infront of a bunch of union employees and did so by misrepresenting the facts. BTW have you read this

[FONT=arial,helvetica]Ken Bode, Jonathan Alter: Hillary Clinton a Loser

http://newsmax.com/archives/ic/2006/2/11/110416.shtml?s=ic

[/FONT]"Media liberals are starting to jump ship on Hillary Clinton, with one CNN veteran calling her a "certain loser" and a Newsweek scribe warning she'll take Democrats on a "kamikaze" mission in 2008."
http://www.business-in-asia.com/ford_thailand.htm
 
shuamort said:
A whole one? Wow. Good thing there aren't other HUGE FINANCIAL PROBLEMS this admin has dug us into. Wait a minute. The spending has been outta control. So much for that.

Just can't stand it can you, but if you think we have HUGE FINANCIAL PROBLEMS what is YOUR solution or better yet what have the Dems proposed?


Aww, did my retarded jab bother you?

Not at all just wonder why you wouldn't use his legal name. And why you think calling the Jr. Senator from New York by her legal name is a jab.

Seems like Hillary HAS honored her husband and marriage.

:rofl which is more than her husband can say? Why on earth would she honor such a man anyway, only fool would do such a thing.

Most folk like Ronald Reagan or Tim Hutchinson or Newt Gingrich feel divorce is ok.

I don't think any of them think it is "OK" but if you believe Bill Clinton is someone who should be honored you surely aren't in a postition to critize them.


Bush came in and the rising trend STARTED.

Nope that's not what I said.
 
Stinger said:
Just can't stand it can you, but if you think we have HUGE FINANCIAL PROBLEMS what is YOUR solution or better yet what have the Dems proposed?
Cut taxes, cut all unnecessary spending and "social programs". Let people decide how they want to spend their money.


Stinger said:
Not at all just wonder why you wouldn't use his legal name. And why you think calling the Jr. Senator from New York by her legal name is a jab.
Legal name? I call bullshit on your argument like usual. Prove that it's her "legal name".


Stinger said:
:rofl which is more than her husband can say? Why on earth would she honor such a man anyway, only fool would do such a thing.
Maybe because she's not married to a killer like George is.

Stinger said:
I don't think any of them think it is "OK" but if you believe Bill Clinton is someone who should be honored you surely aren't in a postition to critize them.
That doesn't even make sense.



Stinger said:
Nope that's not what I said.
That's what I said. Welcome to a conversation.
 
Stinger said:
You didn't, I was pointing out the obvious.
And this matters with respect to my argument how?

Stinger said:
As opposed to GM and Ford who are domestic and haven't had any profits to leave here for quite awhile although I do believe their European divisions are doing better.
Again, this is relevant to my argument in what way?

Stinger said:
Hyundai and Nissan are two of my biggest customers along with many of the Tier 1 suppliers many of whom are foriegn owned. Many of their employees whom I deal with regularly worked for American owned companies before, they don't have any problems, our company doesn't have any problems, perhaps you could be more specific as to what you think the problems are.
Let's start with the outflow of currency to strengthen the economies of foreign countries. The non-legal standing of american law with applicability to foriegn coorperations. That then eventually the american economy is incharge of foreign coorperations whose loyalty lies not with the US.

Stinger said:
"Arrogant" of them, no I don't think you are arrogant of them. But if you invest in them the profits you make come back here and YOU, the red blooded American you are can profit. Anyway the ownership is not so important it's where they are where thier suppliers are. All those employees making all that money spending right here in the good ole USA is pretty good for the economy too. All us suppliers and all our employees right here in the USA too. It's a global economy. I work for a German company, have for over 20 years, we manufacture here too and employee alot of people and purchase goods from suppliers right here too.
Really unrelateable response to what you're quoting of me. Again, it's not what I'm arguing now is it?

Anyway the auto industry is doing just fine right here.[/QUOTE]
 
shuamort said:
Cut taxes, cut all unnecessary spending and "social programs". Let people decide how they want to spend their money.

See we have more in common than you think.


Legal name? I call bullshit on your argument like usual. Prove that it's her "legal name".

She's married to him and when in Arkansas that's what she used and I've heard them introduced as Mr. And Mrs. Bill Clinton. Have you ever heard the Bush's introduced as Mr. and Mrs. Laura Bush? And the fact is she can legally sign her name as Mrs. Bill Clinton but George Bush cannot sign his name Mr. Laura Bush. But why is it a dig to call her by her legal name?


Me>> which is more than her husband can say? Why on earth would she honor such the man anyway, only fool would do such a thing.

Maybe because she's not married to a killer like George is.

Yes Laura accidentally killed someone in a car wreck. But Mrs. Bill Clinton's husband violated his marriage and made a fool of her over and over and over. Why would she honor him?

Me>>
Originally Posted by Stinger
I don't think any of them think it is "OK" but if you believe Bill Clinton is someone who should be honored you surely aren't in a postition to critize them.


That doesn't even make sense.

Sure it does.
 
Stinger said:
Yes Laura accidentally killed someone in a car wreck. But Mrs. Bill Clinton's husband violated his marriage and made a fool of her over and over and over. Why would she honor him?
Simple, they have a child. What would you think Laura would do if she found bush getting a bj under the desk from another woman. Then again it is her personal choice that no one else has the right to critisize.
 
Stinger said:
>> Speaking to an enthusiastic Democratic crowd that increasingly sees jobs moving overseas, Clinton said Thailand should not be granted access to the U.S. auto market.

I think she was clear in what she said.

And the articles are talking about vehicles for the Asian market not here. The Opel built by GM has been produce in Europe for decades but hasn't been brought here for about as long. Mrs. Bill Clinton was trying to make political hay infront of a bunch of union employees and did so by misrepresenting the facts. BTW have you read this

[FONT=arial,helvetica]Ken Bode, Jonathan Alter: Hillary Clinton a Loser

http://newsmax.com/archives/ic/2006/2/11/110416.shtml?s=ic

[/FONT]"Media liberals are starting to jump ship on Hillary Clinton, with one CNN veteran calling her a "certain loser" and a Newsweek scribe warning she'll take Democrats on a "kamikaze" mission in 2008."
http://www.business-in-asia.com/ford_thailand.htm


Vehicles for the Asian market...by US companies. It's pretty clear what she was talking about to those who follow economic current events. They could have built the factories here. But they didn't.
 
Kelzie said:
Vehicles for the Asian market...by US companies. It's pretty clear what she was talking about to those who follow economic current events. They could have built the factories here. But they didn't.

She said she will keep Thailand out of THIS market. And BTW it has become my largest market so I follow it and will be attending a conference next week.

Speaking to an enthusiastic Democratic crowd that increasingly sees jobs moving overseas, Clinton said Thailand should not be granted access to the U.S. auto market.

And most companies have found it more economical to build the cars IN the market they are bound for rather than somewhere else and ship them there. Especially if you are talking from here to there.
 
jfuh said:
Simple, they have a child.

Since when does that give one spouse the right to serially abuse the marriage? It's not better for the child to grow up in a marriage where one spouse abuses it repeatedly. What does that teach the child? It's OK to do it.

What would you think Laura would do if she found bush getting a bj under the desk from another woman.

I can't speak for her but once might be a mistake. When it becomes normal behavior. Remember he went on NATIONAL TV with her and said he made a mistake but that was all over. Guess what, he dishonored her again and again and again.

Then again it is her personal choice that no one else has the right to critisize.

We most certainly can judge her on her actions when she is asking to be the leader of the country. And she stays with a man who has repeatedly degraded her and their marriage. It shows weakness on her part. Wedding vows are a two way street, once on partner violates them the other has not moral obligation to remain. If the other refuses to honor them after dishonor them the first time the other is a fool to remain.

Of course if she hadn't stayed her career would have been over as far as politics.
 
Stinger said:
Not to mention KIA which has finalize it's site selection. They were looking at Meridian MS but after looking at the demograhics the were afraid THERE WEREN'T ENOUGH AVAILABLE WORKERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Now it looks like Texas last I heard.

And your list doesn't include such support companies as Hysco, Topre, ZF, Ogihara, Precission Strip, Mobis and on and on and on.

Mrs. Bill Clinton is clueless.
Actually, we have been loosing industrial jobs for 30 years now. Industry used to be the largest portion of our GDP, now it only makes up 20% of GDP. I am not saying that is either a good or a bad thing, but to argue that we are creating more industrial and auto industry jobs than we are loosing is absolutely ludicrous.

Moreover, it’s almost just as ludicrous for Hillary to argue that electing Democrats would change that.
 
Back
Top Bottom