View Single Post
Old 07-15-2003, 10:43 PM   #3 (permalink)
HarmlessRabbit
Junkie
 
HarmlessRabbit's Avatar
 
Location: San Jose, CA
First off, you're just making a bold assertion with no evidence. Personally, I blame bush for directly affecting the economy in several ways.

- When bush took office, he talked down the tech economy.

http://www.senate.gov/~schumer/1-Sen...s/PR00521.html

- Bush failed to intervene to help california and other states during the fake energy crisis created by Enron and others. His own appointees on FERC failed to use their authority to control outrageous gouging, costing consumers billions and ruining the life of thousands.

http://www.consumerwatchdog.org/util.../pr002919.php3

- Bush failed to directly address the failings of enron and other companies, instead appointing controversial people to run the groups and committees that were supposed to be fixing corruption. This drove down consumer confidence and drove more people out of the stock market.

http://www.usatoday.com/money/compan...-resigns_x.htm

http://www.usatoday.com/money/compan...ignation_x.htm

- Bush's tax cuts have put the economy into a $450 billion deficit. Note that this is $150 billion more than the numbers bush used to justify the tax cut in the first place.

http://www.thewmurchannel.com/politi...51/detail.html


And clinton? Who cares? Why do people obsess over clinton? He's gone. While Hillary may go on to greater things, he's never going to be in public office again.
HarmlessRabbit is offline  
 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76