I don;t what the world was thinking , nor did i have the best most insight on life back then. So when Bill Clinton was in office. who was complaining and why? A bunch of rich people not getting tax beaks? was that all?

Who lived through Bill Clinton here and hated it? I remember the day he was inaugurated but I was young.


ALSO dont bring up anything about monica lewinkski because that is his personal life nothing to do with foreign policy , taxes , ect.

He also reduced the national unemployment rate to it's lowest point in 35 years.

I liked Bill...I don't like his psycho wife, but I like him.

he killed our military numbers

how bout when he let us get attacked over and over and over... and did nothing about it. embassies, U.S.S. Cole, Somalia, etc.

or about how he sat there and bull****ted about the meaning of the word genocide and whether Rwanda was one, while we were not deeply involved in any conflict

or how more soldiers died in active duty during his tenure than G. W's even though there was no war under clinton.???....

or how the economy bubble that he came into from Reagan and Bush burst because he did nothing while in office, hence the tech stock/dot com company crashes.

but he balanced the budget and made regime change in Iraq official U.S. policy [:-]

http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/did_more_soldiers_die_during_bill_clintons.html

Actually, even counting non-combat fatalities, more military personnel died during the first six years of George Bush's tenure than during the entire eight years that Bill Clinton was in office.


http://www.factcheck.org/demos/factcheck/imagefiles/Image/Ask%20FactCheck%20Images/Military_Deaths_Clinton/Military_Deaths.JPG

yeah, that was posted in haste, just something I had heard. and hard to believe at that.


But even just looking at that chart, considering we have been in a war during virtually all of Bush's tenure, clintons numbers still look WAYYY too high

It may surprise many to learn that there are so many military deaths during peacetime. But this is just the law of averages at work. In 1993 the military had 1.7 million men and women in uniform. During that same year, 1,175 of them died from accidents, homicide, suicide and illness. That makes the 1993 non-hostile death rate for military personnel 69.1 per 100,000. That's actually fairly low; the rate for all Americans age 20 to 29 is about 97.5. Today's military is considerably smaller, with just under 1.4 million personnel.

...yeah and i dont need you to keep copying and pasting...i went to the site. it doesn't change the fact that clintons numbers look way too high, no matter how the site tries to explain it.

i dont really know why we are arguing this though, i said that i posted that part of my post in haste.

Regan and Bush senior did nothing to help the economy, ever hear of Reganomics?
Largest economic expansion in U.S. history, lowest amount of people on welfare in 35 years, balanced budget and surplus of money and the world didnt hate us.

Bush got in office and pissed through the surplus, dropped the taxes and started a fight that is to this very day still unjustifiable.
And dont give me that 9/11 bs, that dumb b@stard said there were weapons of mass destruction that posed an imminent threat to the United States. He never said that we needed to free the iraqis, he never said we had to spread democracy and the iraqis had nothing to do with 9/11! Hell they even said that there were no WMD's in Iraq! So you were either lied to or you listened to a dumbass with a vendetta against saddam.


Long live slick willy!!! a.k.a Bill Clinton
And depending on the outcome of the DNC, Ill either be voting for a black man or a bitchy woman.

Anybody who knew anything about national security or foreign policy was complaining during the Clinton years.He was content tolet law enforcement try tohandle the terrorism issue and you see what that got us. He and his foreign policy teamwere incompetent at their best and malfeasant at theirworst. He was responsible for passing the law that prohibited intelligence agencies from sharing information with each other. That law was passed to cover his own interests. As a result of that, it could be argued that led directly to 9/11.

He just kicked the serious problems down the road for 8 years and accomplished nothing of note. His legacy is a blue stained dress.

Ronald Reagans reduced the income tax rates DRAMATICALLY. Yes a lot of the deductions were taken away also and congress, during the Clinton years re-raised those tax rates without bringing the deductions back.

Tax cuts are a boon to the economy and work every time. Lower the tax rates and the Federal coffers fill up. Were it not for the BushII taxcuts he introduced at the beginning of his 1st term I shudder to think what kind of economic mess we would be in.

ORIGINAL: fastbackford351

Anybody who knew anything about national security or foreign policy was complaining during the Clinton years.He was content tolet law enforcement try tohandle the terrorism issue and you see what that got us. He and his foreign policy teamwere incompetent at their best and malfeasant at theirworst. He was responsible for passing the law that prohibited intelligence agencies from sharing information with each other. That law was passed to cover his own interests. As a result of that, it could be argued that led directly to 9/11.





how can anyone possibly buy any of that complete bs? until marshall law is declared and we have tanks rolling down our street law enforcement is still handling the terrorism issue and always has been...always will be...as for the rest, lest we forget that 9-11 happened well into bush's years....an argument can be made that they waited until clinton left....as for clinton letting embassies get blown up...i guess he was supposed to pick up his sidearm and go stand post himself? lol....last time i checked embassies were still gettin blown up nowadays...as for legacys...clinton, even after the monica lewinsky scandal, left office one of the most popular presidents ever....george bush is leaving the most unpopular president in history with lower approval rates than even richard nixon....if you think about it...i guess nearly all the people who like bush are right here in this thread...lol

Didn't Clinton pass NAFTA... This country was built on the backs of the maufacturing worker!!
I guess now we don't have a backbone and we are waiting on a backbone implant made in China!!!!

BJ Bill......he also passed on whacking Ben Laden, let Tomahawks fly against BS targets to pull attention from the (I didn't have sex with that woman) scandal, committed perjury, gutted the military, rode the coatails of Reagen economics, and made the US presidency the laughingstock of the world. +1 Burnsy and Fastback Oh yeah, he was a GREAT president.

99% of politicians just plain suck at their job.

ORIGINAL: spoke2go1

Regan and Bush senior did nothing to help the economy, ever hear of Reganomics?
Largest economic expansion in U.S. history, lowest amount of people on welfare in 35 years, balanced budget and surplus of money and the world didnt hate us.

Bush got in office and pissed through the surplus, dropped the taxes and started a fight that is to this very day still unjustifiable.
And dont give me that 9/11 bs, that dumb b@stard said there were weapons of mass destruction that posed an imminent threat to the United States. He never said that we needed to free the iraqis, he never said we had to spread democracy and the iraqis had nothing to do with 9/11! Hell they even said that there were no WMD's in Iraq! So you were either lied to or you listened to a dumbass with a vendetta against saddam.


Long live slick willy!!! a.k.a Bill Clinton
And depending on the outcome of the DNC, Ill either be voting for a black man or a bitchy woman.



no clinton did that

ok another thing everyone says the military was gutted.


in 1993 our military was BIGGER then today....

Year - GDP on military
1993 4.4
1994 4.0
1995 3.7
1996 3.5
1997 3.3
1998 3.1
1999 3.0
2000 3.0
2001 3.0
2002 3.4
2003 3.7

ORIGINAL: spoke2go1

Regan and Bush senior did nothing to help the economy, ever hear of Reganomics?



....

[sm=icon_rofl.gif][sm=icon_rofl.gif][sm=icon_rofl.gif][sm=icon_rofl.gif][sm=icon_rofl.gif][sm=icon_rofl.gif][sm=icon_rofl.gif][sm=icon_rofl.gif][sm=icon_rofl.gif][sm=icon_rofl.gif]


Thanks for the laugh.

ORIGINAL: SXGT

ok another thing everyone says the military was gutted.


in 1993 our military was BIGGER then today....

Year - GDP on military
1993 4.4
1994 4.0
1995 3.7
1996 3.5
1997 3.3
1998 3.1
1999 3.0
2000 3.0
2001 3.0
2002 3.4
2003 3.7



yes it was bigger then he gutted it and now its smaller what are you getting at?

ORIGINAL: SXGT

ok another thing everyone says the military was gutted.


in 1993 our military was BIGGER then today....

Year - GDP on military
1993 4.4
1994 4.0
1995 3.7
1996 3.5
1997 3.3
1998 3.1
1999 3.0
2000 3.0
2001 3.0
2002 3.4
2003 3.7



I don't want to nit pick or anything, but it started out big from the last administration and it got smaller and smaller... what's your point?

ORIGINAL: 35thAnni99GT

ORIGINAL: SXGT

ok another thing everyone says the military was gutted.


in 1993 our military was BIGGER then today....

Year - GDP on military
1993 4.4
1994 4.0
1995 3.7
1996 3.5
1997 3.3
1998 3.1
1999 3.0
2000 3.0
2001 3.0
2002 3.4
2003 3.7



I don't want to nit pick or anything, but it started out big from the last administration and it got smaller and smaller... what's your point?



I'm going to have to agree with 03_wowee and 35th here.... all that chart shows is information that backs up the exact opposite of what you claim


fail?

fail? sxgt? noooooooo way.

I don't know what you were thinking when you put this up kirby
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ib558-OMMs0

ORIGINAL: 99GTvert

fail? sxgt? noooooooo way, we're going to immigrate to Canada where we can legally marry eachother.



!!!!!!!![:o][:o][:o][:o][:o][:o][:o]!!!!!!!!

ORIGINAL: k0261886

I don't know what you were thinking when you put this up kirby
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ib558-OMMs0



aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahahahahahah;ahahahahdohvcaifhd ahahaava sdfasfa****adfaofhw

ORIGINAL: k0261886

I don't know what you were thinking when you put this up kirby
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ib558-OMMs0



because that wasn't..... questionable


I don't know how else to put it nicely

I love the democrat argument.

Dem- "It doesn't have to make sense, it jsut has to make sense to me"

you see those years with bush and with clinton the GDP went down no **** but with bush it didn't sky rocket back up. Thats my point.

OMG BUSH IS TEH EVILZ !!!










Shut up stupid liberals don't need to hear about it.

im not sure why a video of me was posted in here , this thread is about Bill Clinton. If your not able to stay on topic GTFO.

I think you may be confused as to what the GDP is. The GDP is how much we as a country make. That 4.4% etc. is not the amount of the Federal Budget that is spent on the military. The last website I looked at that had that broken out, the Federal budget for the military was something like 14 or 15%.

Does that website you went on show the GDP for all of those years? Post those numbers. I'd be willing to bet that our GDP has gone up every year and that military spending, in real numbers has increased dramatically also.

DUDE no way somebody went off topic in a forum called off topic..... INSANITY. I think I'm going to go try and break the speed of light with my laser pointer;).

ORIGINAL: fastbackford351

I think you may be confused as to what the GDP is. The GDP is how much we as a country make. That 4.4% etc. is not the amount of the Federal Budget that is spent on the military. The last website I looked at that had that broken out, the Federal budget for the military was something like 14 or 15%.

Does that website you went on show the GDP for all of those years? Post those numbers. I'd be willing to bet that our GDP has gone up every year and that military spending, in real numbers has increased dramatically also.


Military spending in this terribly expensive war has just now caught back up to the pre-Clinton era budget, and its not even adjusted for inflation. I will go and try to pull the stats and graph, I don't remember the website off the top of my head. It was approx 105-110 billion in 92 then Clinton dropped it to the mid 60 billions, now its finally back up into the neighborhood of 105 billion.

http://www.bea.gov/national/nipaweb/TableView.asp#Mid

Check out this link. It has the all the historical data regarding the GDP that you want and then some.

Keep in mind that the numbers on that chart are listed in 'billions of dollars'.

We make much more now as a nation than we did during Clintons reign. President Bush must be doing something right.

i love how people bring up taxes and debt when they debate about this crap. sure Clinton brough the country's debt level down, while Bush raised it up... but at the same time, taxes are lower with Bush as opposed to when Clinton was in office...

people bitch and bitch all the time about taxes, saying "why should we pay for this sh*t", or "theyre taking so much out of my paycheck" and then turn around and bitch when taxes go down, and say "our country is in debt so much"...

get a clue, you cant have both, especially when there's a "war" going on, among other things.

Fastback,

It looks like your link doesn't work. I'm guessing you changed the date settings after opening it and now it goes to a generic link. If I'm right, you probably wanted something more like this link http://www.bea.gov/national/nipaweb/TableView.asp?SelectedTable=6&FirstYear=1992&LastY ear=2008&Freq=Ann

I always thought clinton could've done a much better job until we had the current moron, and now I think clinton did an amazing job managing the country.

This is similar to the way I percieved many people in my daily life as idiots until I became a moderator on MF.

If you can't see how horrible of a job the bush administration and congress did in the last few years, you are absolutely blinded by some sort of asinine loyalty.

I wish people would stop thinking the President has so much of an effect on the economy. The influence the president can have on the economy is not that much at all. Everyone pegs them when its either boom or bust. God damn all you non-economists.[:@]

Thanks for fixing my link. 'preciate it.