Editore"s Note
Tilting at Windmills

Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

July 24, 2007
By: Kevin Drum

REPUBLICAN CHUTZPAH WATCH....Via Steve Benen, the Washington Times reports on the latest campaign strategy from the Republican Party:

Senate Republicans are preparing to take aim at Majority Leader Harry Reid over the August recess for being "all talk but no action"...."We really ought to be asking why this Democrat leadership won't allow Congress to move forward on serious policy debates," [Sen. John] Kyl said, when asked about the talking-points memorandum he is circulating.

You have to give Republicans points for consistency. They bring the Senate to a halt and then blame Democrats for not getting anything done. They destroy FEMA's ability to respond to natural disasters and then hold it up as an example of why you can't trust government to do anything right. They lose a war via unparalleled military incompetence and then claim that liberals are defeatists for pointing it out. They spend 20 years claiming that Social Security is going bankrupt and then use the resulting public insecurity about Social Security as an explanation for why the whole system needs to be privatized.

I could go on, but you get the idea. The question is, will the press help them pass along their latest ode to chutzpah or will they instead give it the mockery it deserves? Unfortunately, I think we know where the smart money is.

Kevin Drum 7:33 PM Permalink | Trackbacks | Comments (110)

Bookmark and Share
 
Comments

The question is, will the press help them pass along their latest ode to chutzpah or will they instead give it the mockery it deserves?

Absolutely, the press will probably even embellish the talking points. The Republicans really are better at this for some reason which is hard to explain since it is so transparent for anyone paying attention.

Posted by: Qwerty on July 24, 2007 at 7:39 PM | PERMALINK

Wow. bold words coming from a Senator who has placed a hold on a government accountability bill.

Posted by: Everblue Staters on July 24, 2007 at 7:40 PM | PERMALINK

Kevin

If what happened last week is any guide, the Republicans will get away with it. The big time corporate broadcast media will swallow the argument hook, line and sinker and won't give Reid and the Democrats a fair opportunity to respond.

Posted by: corpus juris on July 24, 2007 at 7:41 PM | PERMALINK

Here is my link.

Posted by: corpus juris on July 24, 2007 at 7:46 PM | PERMALINK

The Republicans arent getting away with it. Its important to step back and remember that most people dont know who Broder or Brooks is. Look at the poll numbers. Whatever Bush is selling, people arent buying.

If the votes are counted, the Republicans will be buried in the next election.

Posted by: jimmy on July 24, 2007 at 7:48 PM | PERMALINK

I still don't understand why the Dems do not require the Republicans to actually filibuster their opposition to Dem proposals. Let Americans see who is against key Dem proposals and watch Republican stalling methods.

Posted by: jc on July 24, 2007 at 7:48 PM | PERMALINK

Harry needs to start requiring actual fillibustering fillibusters. No mre of this "We're gonna fillibuster" stuff.

Posted by: Clint on July 24, 2007 at 7:50 PM | PERMALINK

I think that it has become so bad that all that the Republicans have to do is to threaten a particular course of action on the spin front, and the Dems cower like little babies.

How else can you explain that there is not so much as just talk of 'inherent contempt' against the Bush administration officials? Dems, if they want to, can have the Congessional officer haul Miers and Bolten to the Capitol in handcuffs and force them to respond to subpoenas or spend the next eighteen months in the basement of the building.

Dems leave no opportunity to live up to their stereotype.

Posted by: gregor on July 24, 2007 at 8:02 PM | PERMALINK

Ah, Kevin.

Talk about misdirection. The issue at hand is Harry Reid's obstuctionism, but Kevin tries to spin it into an unsustainable attack on Republican politics.

Posted by: egbert on July 24, 2007 at 8:06 PM | PERMALINK

"Ah, Kevin. Talk about misdirection. The issue at hand is Harry Reid's obstuctionism, but Kevin tries to spin it into an unsustainable attack on Republican politics."

Proof at last! Egbert is David Broder.

Posted by: Steve Paradis on July 24, 2007 at 8:17 PM | PERMALINK

Ah, Egbert.

Uh, no.

Posted by: Bob M on July 24, 2007 at 8:18 PM | PERMALINK

The Project for Excellence in Media reports todaythat last weeks political theater had a desired outcome for the Democrats.

Posted by: Blue Girl, Red State (aka G.C.) on July 24, 2007 at 8:19 PM | PERMALINK

The Senate rules don't require the old-style filibuster where someone had to stand on the floor for hours on end.

But Reid needs to learn to fight back better. He and the rest of the leadership need to have the list of actions being blocked by the Republicans on the tips of their tongues and repeat it at every opportunity.

Posted by: Joe Buck on July 24, 2007 at 8:19 PM | PERMALINK

I meant Project for Excellence in Journalism.

Posted by: Blue Girl, Red State (aka G.C.) on July 24, 2007 at 8:31 PM | PERMALINK

I keep hearing about a low "congressional approval" rating and how the dems must be doing terrible things. What the hell does this abstract poll question mean in an off year?

All we should care about are in-district and in-state approval ratings of specific congressmen and senators -- and considering all the back-pedalling republicans I think the dems would hold their own today. Elections are a year and a half off. Everyone knows bush is a major f#@k up. Just keep cornering him and his apologists.

Oh yeah, and start pushing some reform in terms of corruption, sunlight, intelligence overhaul, etc. If dems want a lasting majority they have to push good government. Otherwise it's just a temporary victory in a greased pig contest.

Posted by: B on July 24, 2007 at 8:48 PM | PERMALINK

I'm surprised Senator Kyl doesn't know this, but the name of the party is "Democratic," not "Democrat," so he should have written "Democratic leadership." I'm sure he regrets the error.

Posted by: croatoan on July 24, 2007 at 9:05 PM | PERMALINK

Well said, Kevin, and one of your best and bravest (most brave) posts ever.
It should be picked up nationally and referred to.
Thanks.

Posted by: Consider wisely always on July 24, 2007 at 9:05 PM | PERMALINK

I could go on, but you get the idea. - Kevin

No, please don't stop - that's good stuff! We need to be reminded over and over until everyone knows just what they're up to.

Posted by: Psyberian on July 24, 2007 at 9:06 PM | PERMALINK

The big time corporate broadcast media will swallow the argument

Don't mistake complicity for gullibility.

Posted by: Disputo on July 24, 2007 at 9:26 PM | PERMALINK

egbert, we weary of your childish mewling. Begone, snot-nosed dolt.

Posted by: Kenji on July 24, 2007 at 9:33 PM | PERMALINK

Today I had the misfortune of seeing Wolf Blitzer on, of all things, a TV inside an elevator.

His question - I forget the exact wording - was something like: why don't the Democrats do something about the war?

And I thought - my God. I'd have got an D in my high school civics class for framing an issue that way.

Wolf Blitzer: incapable of counting past 50.

Posted by: TedL on July 24, 2007 at 9:40 PM | PERMALINK

These comments are directed specifically at Kevin, but others can chime in.

Are you aware of any study having been or being done on the GOP, the Bush2 administration and the GOP elected officials regarding criminal conduct, (convicted or guilty pleas), allegations of criminal conduct and wrong doing, near-criminal conduct and activites that do not meat the smell test (selfish partisanship or outright political favors that can be questioned as return on campaign investments by the donors).

I think it would be a goood idea to gather all of this in one place and report, subject to review before publishing. From what I have seen over the last 6 years is an uncontrolled penchant for criminality and underhandedness by the gOP and its elected officials. I think the American people should be shown the facts in one big picture now that there is considerable history on how the gOP has opperated. The problem with just reporting single events is after a time they fade from view and mind and are not generally put together to show the totality of the egregious activites of the GOP and its impact on America.

I am suggesting a study that in part would relate specific conduct to waste to the Treasury and the taxpayer, loss of time to the government because of the need to investigate and prosecute allegations of criminal activity.

One example of an issue for such a study is Karl Rove's attempts to politicise the executive agencies with briefings to DOS, DOJ, etc. Was this illegal? If not, why not if view of federal existing legistation?

Can someone put it together, and let America look at the real GOP.

Someone will ask, well what about the Democrats? Well what about them, if they have a beef in the interest of good govenment, they can do a similar study on the Demos.

I think GOP powers that be from the WH to the Party are a criminal gang. If this was not in the political realm, the RICO laws probably would apply to some of the conduct (as it can be looked on as conspiracy to violate laws).

Now is the time to destroy the GOP dragon and maybe a new, kinder and humbler party will find a way to emerge to be a counter balance to the Demo Party.

Posted by: pete on July 24, 2007 at 9:51 PM | PERMALINK

Reid the obstructionist?

It was only last week that the beloved GOP talking point "up or down vote" was officially declared dead. Its demise was little noticed in the aftermath of the Senate Republicans' successful all-night filibuster to block the Reed-Levin bill seeking to begin U.S. troop withdrawals from Iraq. "Up or down vote" was killed by a desperate Republican Party trying to obstruct Democratic accomplishments at any cost in advance of the 2008 elections. And so far, the GOP seems to be getting away with the crime.

For the details, see:
"Up or Down Vote: Death of a GOP Talking Point."

Posted by: Furious on July 24, 2007 at 9:53 PM | PERMALINK

The media has been woefully remiss in serving out one of its legitimate functions in our democracy - that of educating the public at large to the dynamics of our bodypolitik where separate institutions share power, so tyranny by even the majority can be checked. The public is getting a muddled view, (when it is getting a view at all), of this Constitutional crisis, and I think we deserve better from the likes of CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN and even MSNBC.

WTF ladies and gentlemen of the video and print media? Where is your basic understanding of our Constitutional democracy? Where are you hiding it? Surely you've only displayed sophistry, instead of indepth investigation and Constitutional analysis and implication.

Hell, as we are witnessing the prelude to a full story, I fear, where a willful minority of American ideologues housed in the EOP and OVP has been working on us a tyranny of its own, the knuckleheads in the MSM are covering "shop til you shop" stories. Like I said, we deserve better! Luckly, we concerned about democracy have the blogoshpere. Thanx, Kevo

Posted by: kevo on July 24, 2007 at 10:07 PM | PERMALINK

Today I had the misfortune of seeing Wolf Blitzer on, of all things, a TV inside an elevator.

Why would they do that to people? I had to listen to that Glen Beck guy at the airport. Next time I'll bring ear plugs.

Posted by: B on July 24, 2007 at 10:11 PM | PERMALINK

Ted Kennedy is pounding Gonzales about torture at Gitmo, and the AG has paled, and then said some activities are beyond the pale. and I have esp writing that

Posted by: consider wisely and that's enough on July 24, 2007 at 10:23 PM | PERMALINK

"The Project for Excellence in Media reports todaythat last weeks political theater had a desired outcome for the Democrats."

Not quite, or at least not completely, based on the information at the link you provided. I think the Senate Democrats wanted two things: to highlight the difference between Republicans and Democrats on Iraq, and to highlight the obstructionist tactics of Senate Republicans.

Your link shows that people are talking about Iraq again, but it's not clear to me that they really got both of the lessons that the Democrats wanted them to get. McClatchy sure got it, but did any of the other news organizations?

Posted by: PaulB on July 24, 2007 at 10:23 PM | PERMALINK

This is a way too sad commentary on our once noble press.

Posted by: Mazurka on July 24, 2007 at 10:32 PM | PERMALINK

My local paper is a McClatchy outfit (But you know that - *wink*) and I do forget sometimes that not everyone is so fortunate.

Posted by: Blue Girl, Red State (aka G.C.) on July 24, 2007 at 10:33 PM | PERMALINK

"They bring the Senate to a halt and then blame Democrats for not getting anything done."

You know Kevin, the rules of the Senate haven't change between the last Congress when the Dems had a minority of 40+ Senators and this one. The failure of the Dems to move anything in Senate is more likely due to Harry Reid's incompetence than on the GOP's ability to keep "popular" Democratic legislation from passing. If the Senate leadership is incapable of producing legislation that can draw the support of the dozen or so true Senate RINOs to vote for closure, then that legislation must be too terrible to imagine.

Posted by: Chicounsel on July 25, 2007 at 12:41 AM | PERMALINK

Or, Chicounsel, the rabid Republicans are very good at ensuring that their party votes in lockstep and without regard to the will of the people. As it turns out, my answer is correct, yours is mere partisan misdirection.

Posted by: heavy on July 25, 2007 at 1:02 AM | PERMALINK

I'd like to see the story that Pete suggests -- pulling together all Cheney-Bush Administration outrages since 2000.

Actually, the major media outlets have been doing the job piecemeal as is their wont but it wouldn't take much to go through back issues, gather the facts and pull them together. Start with the Washington Post, then go on to the NY Times and Los Angeles Times. The TV networks also have had stories about one outrage or another as has NPR. Assign a few interns to make notes -- and go from there. (Oh, and don't forget Bill Maher -- his latest HBO show was something of a compilation with a real ass kicker at the end. Heh, heh.)

Posted by: goodidea on July 25, 2007 at 1:04 AM | PERMALINK

Here is a short list for a start on researching:
Tom Delay
Karl Rove
the Alaskan3
Noe
Cunningham, et al
Scooter Libby
the CIA or other black-bag operators kidnapping innocent persons
reditions
illegal syping on US residents
the K street operation and the other lobbists
"caging" minority voters
politically motivated criminal charges
illegal wars
physically caging protesters in violation of free speech
government threats to peaceful protesters
the GOP phone scam in the Northeast
politicising the DOJ
Rove's political speaches to other departments
Bush2's admission to illegal spying
misuse of executive privilege
criminal conduct in awarding and supervising government contracts in Iraq and in NO, La
Bush2's disregard for other people's lives

Posted by: pete on July 25, 2007 at 1:47 AM | PERMALINK


The Senate rules don't require the old-style filibuster where someone had to stand on the floor for hours on end.

I don't believe that is true. My understanding is that Reid required an all night session between the time the cloture motion was filed and the vote taken. After the cloture vote failed, he withdrew the bill. If he wanted a real filibuster, he would not have withdrawn the bill and require continuous debate until one side gave in.

Posted by: Jeff R. on July 25, 2007 at 9:02 AM | PERMALINK

I think the Democrats need to study Martial Arts.

In other words, absorb the blow and let the enemy use its own energy against itself.

Example: we all know Reid is, at best, a moderate. There is not much liberal about him. If there is one guy who under normal circumstances could work with the opposition it would be Reid. But the Republicans have become so radicalized that working with the Democrats is out of the question.

So what to do? Bring on a war leader . Elect someone who is the opposite of Reid -- a liberal, a fighter -- who will not work to get consensus, but someone who will work to make sure no legislation that supports the war, or other areas of the Bush agenda gets passed.

Or at least threaten that.

If the Republicans don't like Reid, they should say "we'll be happy to bring on someone else -- someone you really won't like."

Reid helped Bush fund the war; Reid helped Bush with his immigration bill. The Democrats should remind the Republicans that if they go after Reid they will soon face someone with no illusions of ever working with the Republicans.

Posted by: Dicksknee on July 25, 2007 at 9:35 AM | PERMALINK

Orwell

Don't you know the difference between 51 and 60? The Democrats don't control the Senate, they are the majority party. Big difference. But based on your post, I'm sure you'd support the Dems going nuclear and getting rid of the filibuster rule.

Posted by: tomeck on July 25, 2007 at 10:28 AM | PERMALINK

No, please don't stop - that's good stuff! We need to be reminded over and over until everyone knows just what they're up to.

The Republicans learned this a long time ago. Just keep repeating stuff -- whether true or not -- and it will eventually become "common knowledge", like the Iraq/9-11 connection, al Qaeda in Iraq, etc.

Posted by: Qwerty on July 25, 2007 at 10:40 AM | PERMALINK

...give it the mockery it deserves?

Ok, How's this...

Posted by: elmo on July 25, 2007 at 10:47 AM | PERMALINK

Norman, you're having an e-mail problem this morning.

Posted by: mailer daemon on July 25, 2007 at 11:58 AM | PERMALINK

If the Republicans don't like Reid, they should say "we'll be happy to bring on someone else -- someone you really won't like."

If they don't like Harry Reid they would really hate John Kerry.

Posted by: Blue Girl, Red State (aka G.C.) on July 25, 2007 at 12:08 PM | PERMALINK

Why is it that we are having a recess this August? Reid should call off the recess.

Posted by: POed Lib on July 25, 2007 at 12:44 PM | PERMALINK

Some have has a cynical take on Republican filibustering.
... the Republican party is pursuing an even more cynical strategy. The GOP caucus, led by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, is determined to block any and all significant legislation from even making it to the president's desk. McConnell's goal is to deny the Democrats any legislative achievements whatsoever, to make them look incompetent and unwilling to deliver on their campaign promises. ...McConnell clearly thinks that if he can keep the Democratically-led Congress from accomplishing anything, that the people who "took a chance" on the Democrats in the last election will get fed up and return to the GOP. That's why he brings up Congress's historically low approval ratings every chance he gets....
It's not implausible.

Posted by: Mike on July 25, 2007 at 1:13 PM | PERMALINK

It really wasn't military incompetence so much as the civilian leadership. True that the administration installed lackey commanders, but I'm reluctant to blame the failure in Iraq on the military. I think George Bush and Dick Cheney hold *far* more blame.

Posted by: MC on July 25, 2007 at 1:44 PM | PERMALINK

Some more on the list to investigate:
Abarmoff and his whole web
the discharge of the fed. AGs
whether the war on Iraq by Bush2 was illegal underAmerican law and international law
Whether Bush2, Rumsfeld and others in the administration have committed crimes against humanity and war crimes
Is the US illegally funding Isreal's confiscation of Arad laneds in Palestine
How many in Cogress do or have committed illegal or ethically dubious hiring of their children, wives or girl friends.

Can anyone add to this list or even suggest elimination of inconsequential issues?

I am serious, but have a bit of a problem with researching as I live overseas and the Big Nanny sometimes blocks access.

If all who are interested can add an item to fill in information or other issues, perhaps we can make this Wiki kind of project. If there is enough interest, maybe some blogger would host an ongoing place to handle the input.

Posted by: pete on July 25, 2007 at 11:04 PM | PERMALINK

I am really late to this party, but for those wanting a handy-dandy reference to Bush scandals, Hugh Makes a List for your convenience. (I gave him "undelivered mail at Walter reed")

Posted by: Blue Girl, Red State (aka G.C.) on July 25, 2007 at 11:28 PM | PERMALINK

Blue:
That is just what I was looking for. Thanks.
In the environment created by Bush2 and his gang and the GOP a very close look indeed needs to be made of the whole of that structure that got America saddled with criminal mentalities at the highest levels of government as well as at the operational levels and conned into a criminal war in Iraq. Perhaps Bush2 and Dick should be swinging from the yardarms?

Thanks again.

Posted by: Pete on July 26, 2007 at 11:26 PM | PERMALINK

BUSH ECONOVOMITS
JOBS
NET NEW JOBS PER MONTH

Clinton?237,000
Carter----218,000
Reagan---175,000
Bush II----70,000 (He brags on this-wow)

TOTAL STOCK MARKET GROWTH
PERCENT INCREASE PER YEAR

Clinton---41%
Bush I----21
Reagan---17
Carter------5
Bush II-----4 ( he calls this Zoom?)

How? Yes, much money has been made as the stocks climbed out of deep hole.
Example?Cisco zoomed from $75 to $15. Deep hole. Then, over six years it zoomed to $35.
S& P just recently reached it?s 2000 Level.
One-Half the Dow thousands just go back to 2000 level. Not Dow 30.
HOME COSTS

Average annual income to buy an average priced home
2000-3.2 years----2006?5.4 years
An increase of 68% over six years.
The next noise you hear will be Foreclosure Boom
INFLATION

Ignore gasoline?home prices?education prices?heath care prices
Everything is beautiful if you can control the numbers.
MONEY SUPPLY

M-3
Increase in each decade
1970?1207 Billion
1980---2266
1990---2612
2000---3693 (6 years)

Increase per year for each decade
1970?120
1980---226
1990---261
2000---615 (6 years) will hit 800?
Life is grand when Chairman and all Federal Reserve Officials are ?Conservative? Republicans
Ok! So the Europeans can buy our goods now?
In 2000 it took $.83 to buy a Euro. Now it takes $1.37
3 course-set lunch?London-$61.50?Nyc-$45
Four Seasons Room?London-$1,000?Nyc-$465

DEBT?

1980?Less than 1000 Billion (after 200 years)
1990---4,000 (12 years of Conservative Republicanism)
2000---5700
2007--- 8881 (7-10-07) wow! More Spend and Borrow let Kids Pay Tomorrow Conservatism

SPENDING

Clinton last budget 1.84 Trillion. Bush up to 2.9 with one budget to go.
Reagan increased Total Sending by 80%. Bush may tie LBJ at 60%.
Note how Heritage-AEI and all Conservatives count only one-half of the budget as their presidents responsibility. Watch them on Revenues. They will cheat. They will use correlations where there is no connection.
SAVINGS

Total National Savings has gone negative for first time since Conservative Big Crash

PROFITS

Corporate profits at all time high
Buy overseas at $.50 cent per hour labor and sell to suckers as tho $10 per hour labor
Keep minimum wage as low as possible.
Use two part time instead one full time
Do not pay Insurance.
Maximize Profits like good Christians.
Ever hear of optimizing profits?
Buy Washington. It is cheap.

INTEREST RATES

Republican Federal Reserve let Clinton end with a 6.5 % rate then few months later gave Bush a 1% rate. If this Federal Reserve is non-partisan I will shoot a 61 tomorrow.
Greenspan gave Clinton 13 significant rate hikes during campaign years.
Everything is beautiful if you are Mega-Rich.

Clarence Swinney
Political Research Historian since 1991 on Reagan-Clinton-Bush II administrations
Burlington nc
cwswinney@netzero.net

Posted by: clarence swinney on July 30, 2007 at 4:43 PM | PERMALINK

SMEAR KINGS
The Conservatives wandered in the wilderness from Coolidge until Reagan.

When Nixon resigned they went crazy with Hatred.

Reagan gave then a Soap Box to spread hatred.

When my Lord Clinton stomped Bush I they exploded with fury of Madness and Hatred.

They had a Congress whose leading spokesperson said in 1994 “If we get Congress we will investigate every decision made by this administration”.

True to his word Congress spent, according to GAO ($110,000,000), on Hearings and Investigations of the Clinton administration.

Their hatred became very abusive through right wing radio talk shows like Mush Dimbaugh who was recorded as spreading over 10,000 LIES(intent to deceive) in 4,000 hours of his transcripts. Edit by FAIR. Author’s extrapolation.

Their smearing of Clinton was local.

Now, the self-admitted Recovering Alcoholic Bush has made us a Worldwide Laughing Stock.

South America is electing leaders who exhibit true Christian virtues like “Care for the Least Amongst thee”.

Some are yelling—“WHO IS AFRAID OF THE BIG BAD BUSH”

World leaders who have met him laugh at his ignorance.

Oh! How I long for another Clinton Type leader.

One who is exceptionally intelligent

One who knows Governance.

One who truly cares about America.

One who cares for the less fortunate.

One who knows democracies thrive under a hugh middle class.

One who when he gets wealth uses it to do good for the least amongst us.

One who knows that when a small percent own the majority of the nation’s wealth
A Christian God will not allow them to survive for centuries.

The lower 80% will Revolt.

Had Clinton kept his zipper zapped I would put him on the Empire State Building in lights 100 feet high.

I love Bill Clinton. Very much.

Clarence Swinney
Political Historian since 1991 of Reagan-Clinton-Bush II administrations.
President-Retired-Lifeaholics of America
WORK FOR A LIFE NOT JUST A LIVING (like Bill Clinton)

Posted by: clarence swinney on July 30, 2007 at 4:48 PM | PERMALINK

BUSH ECONOVOMITS
SWINNEY FACT CHECK on Zoom Economy

1. GDP--very high growth.
Consumer spending is 70% of the total. Debt for that spending all time record. By Far. National Saving negative first time since Repub Great Depression. Govt spent 3,000B of money borrowed from foreigners to aid the spending.

2. Debt as % of National Income--In 2000 it was 80% and in 2005 it was 110%.

Also, check number 6 or Money Supply. Federal Reserve increasing money supply. Awesome.

This not a healthy economic growth. Except for ULTRA-RICH.

2. DOW--Clinton hit record 11,720 in 2000. Bush is less than 2,000 above that record. Bush has passed a 1,000 mark twice. Clinton 8.
Clinton increase to his top was 8,200 billion. That was big.

The S&P plus One-half Dow stocks are just now back to 2000 level.

Let us look at TOTAL STOCK MARKET not 30 stocks.

Per Year Increase
Clinton-41%
Bush I-21%
Reagan-17%
Carter-5%
Bush II-4% this is a zoom? Six years.

3. Nasdaq. Clinton record 5000 in 2000. Bush record is to cut it in half--ZOOM down is not good.

4. JOBS--Oh! How we practice to deceive say Conservatives. They tried using Reagan record as from 1983 to 1989. Six years. Omit two years? Come on! Integrity shall never meet me.
They are trying the same deception with Bush. Omit 2001 and 2002.

BUSH NET JOB INCREASE--70,000 per month over 6 years(less one month) This the Big Big ZOOM? He brags on this. Crazy or dumb?
Reagan-175,000 per month over 8 years.
Carter-218,000 per month over 4 years.
Clinton-237,000 per month over 8 years.

5.HOUSING--low interest rates did the boom. Big Money Boom by Fed. Tax Cuts had little effect. Bush big time Moogumboo.
Foreclosures ahead! Big Time.

The number of years of average income to buy a new home at average prices.SHOCKING
Check this closely.

1950-2.5 years
1960-2.4 years
1970-2.5 years
1980-3.5 years
1990-4.3 years
2000-3.2 years
2006-5.4 years---this is a Zoom. Wrong direction.

A 68% Increase in six years is not a good ZOOM.

Wages have been too slow or prices too high or a combination.
Baby Boomers will create a genuine mess in our budgets.

Taking bets on Foreclosures. 5 million or 10 million over next five years.

6. MONEY SUPPLY
Bush Sr. claimed Greenspan policies cost him a re-election.
He was correct. Look at tight money supply for him.
Increases ?per year? average in Money supply-In Billions.
Reagan-239---Bush I?56---Clinton?380---Bush II ?760 (5 years)
Bush Sr. was correct. Greenspan did not attempt to stimulate the economy for him.
M-1 + M-1 Increase per decade.
1980 Decade-88%--1990 Decade?48%--2000(5 months) 55%
Monthly Average Increase in Decades?1980?s?120B per month?1990?s 64B per month?2006 (5 years + 4 months)-400 B.
Federal Reserve.gov 6-26-07
120-64-(400 in one half a decade is obvious favoritism).
If they continue that trend it will be 120-64-700.
It is obvious the Federal Reserve favored Reagan and now Bush II.

He opened the Printing Presses full time for Jr.
He shafted Clinton with 6.5% interest rate and gave Bush II a 1% rate.

6. SPENDING?Bush inherited spending at 18.5% of GDP and in first term took it to 20.3%. Eight years=disaster. Watch Conservatives try to remove one-half the budget by using Discretionary only. A President is responsible for ALL spending.

Do not let them Goering you with IRAQ the spending problem.
Last two years we spent over 5000 Billion in total. 500B in four years on Iraq. They will try to Goering us.

7. DEBT?all fault of Iraq War
Someone needs to check percentages.
Since inception of illegal slaughterama President Cheney and Puppet Bush have spent $12,379 Billion. $450 Billion on killings.
How has 3% created $3000 Billion of Debt?

8. CORPORATE PROFITS
Yes! Zoom Level. Buy overseas at $.50 per hour labor and sell to us as tho it is $10.00 per hour labor.

Whoever is President during 2010-2020 will be in deep doodoo.
Since 1980 this nation's economy has been turned upside down.

From WWII to 1980 all Income-Wealth quintiles increased almost evenly percentage wise.

Since 1980 it has been rush to top with bottom 75% stagnated.

clarence swinney
political research historian of Reagan-Clinton-Bush II administration since 1991.
president-Lifeaholics of America
clarenceswinney@bellsouth.net


Posted by: clarence swinney on October 14, 2007 at 5:53 PM | PERMALINK

Great site. Good info.

Posted by: akyma tramadol on July 24, 2009 at 2:17 AM | PERMALINK

Beautiful site!

Posted by: adipex cheap online ordering on July 31, 2009 at 1:19 AM | PERMALINK

Perfect work!

Posted by: tramadol injection on August 1, 2009 at 3:22 AM | PERMALINK

rdqnjY Great work, webmaster, nice design!

Posted by: tramadol celebrex on August 2, 2009 at 11:58 AM | PERMALINK

I want to say - thank you for this!

Posted by: adipex zenical cod adipex and zoloft on August 3, 2009 at 10:29 PM | PERMALINK

Great work, webmaster, nice design!

Posted by: tramadol seventy online on August 3, 2009 at 11:57 PM | PERMALINK

Great. Now i can say thank you!

Posted by: buy cheap viagra 32 on August 4, 2009 at 1:21 AM | PERMALINK

Great site. Good info.

Posted by: free online viagra pill on August 4, 2009 at 12:50 PM | PERMALINK

Excellent site. It was pleasant to me.

Posted by: tramadol and ibuprofen on August 4, 2009 at 2:18 PM | PERMALINK

Perfect work!

Posted by: adipex vs bontril on August 4, 2009 at 7:27 PM | PERMALINK

I bookmarked this link. Thank you for good job!

Posted by: adipex effects harmful side on August 9, 2009 at 2:21 PM | PERMALINK

Great site. Keep doing.

Posted by: viagra professionl on August 11, 2009 at 10:17 PM | PERMALINK

Great site. Keep doing.

Posted by: diffrent ypes of adipex on August 12, 2009 at 4:47 PM | PERMALINK

Great work, webmaster, nice design!

Posted by: tramadol out of urine test on August 12, 2009 at 7:42 PM | PERMALINK

If you have to do it, you might as well do it right.

Posted by: buy tramadol c o d on August 13, 2009 at 1:20 AM | PERMALINK

Perfect work!

Posted by: soma and aleeve on August 13, 2009 at 4:02 AM | PERMALINK

Great. Now i can say thank you!

Posted by: ingredients of viagra on August 14, 2009 at 2:49 AM | PERMALINK

If you have to do it, you might as well do it right.

Posted by: adipex medication on August 14, 2009 at 2:58 PM | PERMALINK

Very interesting site. Hope it will always be alive!

Posted by: which is stronger tramadol or percoset on August 14, 2009 at 5:53 PM | PERMALINK

Great. Now i can say thank you!

Posted by: use of tramadol in veterinary medicine on August 14, 2009 at 11:39 PM | PERMALINK

Excellent site. It was pleasant to me.

Posted by: cheap flight northwest airline soma on August 15, 2009 at 2:31 AM | PERMALINK

If you have to do it, you might as well do it right.

Posted by: tramadol hcl acetamenophen on August 15, 2009 at 8:08 AM | PERMALINK

I want to say - thank you for this!

Posted by: making tramadol injectable on August 16, 2009 at 1:22 AM | PERMALINK

Great work, webmaster, nice design!

Posted by: problems with viagra on August 16, 2009 at 4:01 AM | PERMALINK

Incredible site!

Posted by: pharmacy viagra fuerteventura on August 16, 2009 at 9:28 PM | PERMALINK

Great. Now i can say thank you!

Posted by: average cost of tramadol on August 17, 2009 at 3:27 AM | PERMALINK

If you have to do it, you might as well do it right.

Posted by: fedex xanax valium on August 17, 2009 at 6:25 AM | PERMALINK

I want to say - thank you for this!

Posted by: day delivery next tramadol on August 17, 2009 at 9:34 AM | PERMALINK

Great work, webmaster, nice design!

Posted by: adipex or phermine on August 17, 2009 at 12:57 PM | PERMALINK

It is the coolest site, keep so!

Posted by: no rx adipex sales on August 18, 2009 at 4:19 AM | PERMALINK

Very interesting site. Hope it will always be alive!

Posted by: the viagra song on August 19, 2009 at 4:49 AM | PERMALINK

I bookmarked this link. Thank you for good job!

Posted by: somas will mess you up on August 19, 2009 at 2:04 PM | PERMALINK

Very interesting site. Hope it will always be alive!

Posted by: tramadol widrawl on August 20, 2009 at 4:48 AM | PERMALINK

Excellent site. It was pleasant to me.

Posted by: classification of tramadol drug on August 20, 2009 at 7:39 AM | PERMALINK

I bookmarked this link. Thank you for good job!

Posted by: tramadol drug classification on August 20, 2009 at 10:32 AM | PERMALINK

Great site. Keep doing.

Posted by: what is tramadol hcl on August 21, 2009 at 8:28 AM | PERMALINK

Beautiful site!

Posted by: valium sedation on August 21, 2009 at 11:33 AM | PERMALINK

It is the coolest site, keep so!

Posted by: adipex by online prescription on August 22, 2009 at 3:39 AM | PERMALINK

I bookmarked this link. Thank you for good job!

Posted by: what is in soma on August 22, 2009 at 12:49 PM | PERMALINK

Great site. Keep doing.

Posted by: adipex online without prescription online pharmacy on August 23, 2009 at 12:49 AM | PERMALINK

Beautiful site!

Posted by: tramadol hcl site on August 23, 2009 at 3:44 AM | PERMALINK

I bookmarked this link. Thank you for good job!

Posted by: soma online prescription us on August 23, 2009 at 6:06 AM | PERMALINK

I want to say - thank you for this!

Posted by: where to buy adipex on August 26, 2009 at 12:06 PM | PERMALINK

Great site. Good info.

Posted by: adipex review on August 27, 2009 at 2:52 AM | PERMALINK

I want to say - thank you for this!

Posted by: soma chakraborty on August 27, 2009 at 4:45 AM | PERMALINK

Beautiful site!

Posted by: soma vs tramadol on August 30, 2009 at 9:16 AM | PERMALINK

Excellent site. It was pleasant to me.

Posted by: tramadol alcohol on August 30, 2009 at 4:45 PM | PERMALINK

I want to say - thank you for this!

Posted by: cheap tramadol no prescription on August 30, 2009 at 8:32 PM | PERMALINK

Very nice site!

Posted by: Pharme540 on September 18, 2009 at 12:36 AM | PERMALINK

Perfect site, i like it!

Posted by: valium on line with prescription on October 29, 2009 at 1:59 PM | PERMALINK

Great work, webmaster, nice design!

Posted by: pump up the valium on November 1, 2009 at 1:04 PM | PERMALINK

If you have to do it, you might as well do it right.

Posted by: does valium cause halucinations on November 9, 2009 at 4:18 PM | PERMALINK

Very interesting site. Hope it will always be alive!

Posted by: soma refills on November 16, 2009 at 12:46 AM | PERMALINK

Very interesting site. Hope it will always be alive!

Posted by: valium rouche on November 16, 2009 at 7:19 PM | PERMALINK

I want to say - thank you for this!

Posted by: clonazepam vs valium dosage on November 22, 2009 at 2:11 PM | PERMALINK

If you have to do it, you might as well do it right.

Posted by: interaction valium on December 3, 2009 at 1:46 AM | PERMALINK

Incredible site!

Posted by: chewing valium on December 3, 2009 at 5:32 AM | PERMALINK

It is the coolest site, keep so!

Posted by: is valium diazepam safe for dogs on December 22, 2009 at 4:04 AM | PERMALINK

Great work, webmaster, nice design!

Posted by: lorazepam soma interactions on December 28, 2009 at 12:46 AM | PERMALINK

comment6

Posted by: usa online auto insurance on January 27, 2010 at 9:19 AM | PERMALINK

I usually don't ordinarily post on many another Blogs, nevertheless I just has to say thank you for The Washington Monthly... keep up the amazing work. Ok unfortunately its time to get to school.

Posted by: Blackjack on January 20, 2011 at 4:34 AM | PERMALINK




 

 

Read Jonathan Rowe remembrance and articles
Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

Advertise in WM



buy from Amazon and
support the Monthly