Many of you may know about the New Scotsman article which claims that Al Gore and Jimmy Carter have agreed to a joint endorsement of Barack Obama. A reader has sent me a persuasive email containing a strong denial by a Gore spokesperson. The information is not solid at this moment, but I expect to have it confirmed.
In the meantime -- notice how the New Scotsman went to press without first asking for comment from Gore? A newspaper isn't supposed to do things like that.
The Nightmare Years, continued: Let's return to our previous post on Barry's claim that the 1990s were The Nightmare Years for Pennsylvanians, and for the American working class in general. Sure enough, the Obama-maniacs have tried to defend that argument. Here are the PA facts, Jack (as compiled by the Clinton administration toward the end of his second term):
Unemployment Down to 4.1%: The unemployment rate in Pennsylvania has declined from 7.3% to 4.1% since 1993.Prog propagandists will try to convince you that thousands of PA residents had to sell the family homestead and take scut work at the local Mickey D, but the numbers tell a different story. Remember, when BC came into office, his primary priority, of necessity, was bringing down the crushing debt inflicted on him by Bush and Reagan. Which he did. I never expected him to bring about the level of prosperity which he attained.
503,600 New Jobs: 503,600 new jobs have been created in Pennsylvania since 1993 -- an average of 71,096 jobs per year. In contrast, an average of 500 jobs were lost each year under the previous administration.
486,300 New Private Sector Jobs: Since 1993, 486,300 new private sector jobs have been created—an average of 68,654 jobs per year, compared to an average loss of 2,325 private sector jobs per year in the previous administration.
43,600 New Construction Jobs: 43,600 construction jobs have been created in Pennsylvania since 1993 -- an average of 6,155 jobs per year. In contrast, an average of 8,775 construction jobs were lost each year during the previous administration.
Poverty Has Fallen: Nationally, the poverty rate has fallen from 15.1% in 1993 to 12.7% in 1998. In Pennsylvania, the poverty rate has fallen from 13.2% in 1993 to 11.2% in 1998 --down 2.0% under President Clinton. [Census Bureau]
450,000 Have Received a Raise: Approximately 193,000 Pennsylvania workers benefited from an increase in the minimum wage—from $4.25 to $4.75 -- on October 1, 1996. They, along with about 257,000 others received an additional raise—from $4.75 to $5.15 -- on September 1, 1997.
A $500 Child Tax Credit to Help Families Raising Children: To help make it easier for families to raise their children, the balanced budget included a $500 per-child tax credit for children under 17. Thanks to President Clinton, the Balanced Budget delivers a child tax credit to 1,185,000 families in Pennsylvania.
Homeownership Has Increased in Pennsylvania: Homeownership in Pennsylvania increased from 72.3% to 75.2% since 1993.
Business Failures Down 7.0% Per Year: Business failures have dropped an average of 7.0% per year since 1993, after increasing 30.8% per year during the previous four years. [Oct 98 data]
Over $25,000 of Reduced Federal Debt for Every Family of Four: The national debt will be $1.7 trillion lower in FY99 than projected in 1993 -- that's $25,000 less debt for each family of four in Pennsylvania this year.
2.0% Growth in Total Bank Loans and Leases: Pennsylvania has seen a 2.0% average growth rate in total bank loans and leases per year since 1993. In contrast total bank loans and leases fell an average of 1.3% per year during the previous administration.
1.1% Growth in Commercial and Industrial Loans and Leases: Since 1993, Pennsylvania has experienced a 1.1% annual growth rate in commercial and industrial loans and leases. In contrast, commercial and industrial loans and leases fell an average of 5.5% per year during the previous administration.
You think Austan Goolsbee and Jeff Liebman are going to end free trade and bring manufacturing jobs back to places like Pennsylvania? Obama and his econ guys are Libertarians at heart. So are his media surrogates, Markos Moulitsas and Arianna Huffington. They are simply posing as progs to get into positions of power.
(And before you repeat that despicable prog lie about Hillary and NAFTA, play the video above -- paying special attention to the message on the yellow background.)
A word about Arianna: She may have changed her party registration, but she has never altered her core beliefs. In her latest, she decries Hillary's recent (and perfectly appropriate) statements as Rovian. That's a laugh, coming from Arianna. In the 1990s, she showed Karl how to do it. And she's still doing his work.
4 comments:
So that was what you were talking about (Scotsman....I was wondering what that was...).
I heard Carter on Sunday, saying that he will announce his endorsement after all the votes have been cast ( but hint hint, my family likes Obama).
I haven't heard a word out of Gore ( if I was him I would call "Hill" and tell her to F---K herself).
I never heard Obama call Clinton Years " Nightmare Years"... Did I miss another memo?
People falling through the cracks even during the Clinton (Bill's and that is different from "Hill's") years, doesn't mean Clinton was a "Nightmare". It means that "HOLY BILL" was great, just not perfect(ohhhh Brother, I could make mince meat out of that...but ..never mind).
Joe,
My parents like Republicans ( long story) and they don't even live in the US. My Husband declared Obama "the shifty eyed/don't know who he is/can't trust him/get a load of that Michelle).
The only real person (outside of the blog sphere) I talk to about politics is a Hillary supporter.
I don't hate "Hill" or "Bill". I'll vote D no matter whose name is front of the D column.
In another words Joe, I am perfect to convert! The thing is, You have not persuaded me...yet. I respect you Joe!
But for God's sake give me something to chew on.
I never expected him to bring about the level of prosperity which he attained.
Neither did he, I suspect, nor DID he, by his own actions alone.
Fact is, the now much maligned Greenspan and his bubbles and low interest rate regimes had a lot to do with it. It is slowly becoming clear that some if not most of the Clinton economy's good numbers related to bubble artifacts. One example is the large amount of capital gains realized and paid for in CG taxes, from the Silicon Valley/telecom/NASDAQ bubble. That it was illusory was shown in the eventual huge bankruptcies (i.e., financial crimes) associated with telecos like Global Crossing. Well before Clinton left office, the NASDAQ had crashed in typical bubble-collapse mode to about half the runup value achieved. BUT in the meantime, prior to the collapse of the high tech bubble in NASDAQ, very large double digit billions of dollars in capital gains taxes were paid each year, substantially reducing the deficit and contributing to the eventual surpluses. But not in a sustainable way, as it turned out.
Similarly, via a combination of global economic factors, Europe was disfavored for investors' money, and the Asian markets collapsed, making the dollar and the US economy the recipients of much international capital, boosting the value of the dollar, reducing the costs of imports, and holding inflation down. This was a luck factor.
Still and all, it was the agreement Clinton made and held to, to be fiscally responsible and perhaps overly fiscally responsible, that allowed Greenspan to keep interest rates low, and foster these good developments. It cost him dearly, being the main reason the Democrats lost majority control of both houses of Congress, and therefore the reason the GOP had the committee chairmanships to hound his administration with the some 70 odd Congressional investigations that hamstrung the administration.
...sofla
Right on, sofla!
I want political leadership that will put the (literally bankrupt) Federal Reserve in its place, protect the general welfare and the Constitution.
Gary McGowan
Post a Comment