The Reelection of Bush,No Problem!!

[Equity Trader]

Died hard liberals would like nothing better than to see Americans stand in breadlines and the economy sinks even further..Friends, this is their only chance and a slim one at that..With the recent tax signing bill and 70% that is now front-loaded will in uncertain terms rebound this economy on a forward momemtum..The economy is or has already turned the corner,but what really needs to happen is a sustained growth of 3% or higher and presently sitting at around .023% will not be enough to diminish the 4 million people that are out of work.

This will change and jobs will come,as the manufacturing sector has turned around from existing inventories to begin purchasing again,which will result in a uptick in production at all levels.. The consumers are still buying and the housing sector is still strong and now that spring and summer is upon us,which has always been the period for strong indicators and interest still historically low makes this a real plus...Yeah, you Democrats hate it win Bush is in a win win mode,don't you..

Democrats have lost on every front and can't seem to grasp any issues that they can call their own...Just take a look at the current runners for Bush's job...Geez what a bunch of shallow thinkers and timid participants..There are 9 of these candidates and not one has a real agenda,just more negative attacks and foolish behavour..Their last pow-pow in N.C was a real disaster and it was just beautiful to see them attack each other..Only Sharpten said it best "we are going nowhere attacking each other".Don't you just love to see our elected leaders behaving like school children in a playground..Can't you Democrats come up with someone with more zeal? Don't fret,you still have good old Bill to look back on and hope..That egotistical selfserving." I'm in your face again attitude", just can't seem to give the stage to the 9 that are running..This is a real problem for the current candidates..They are being overshadowed by your beloved leader,not that these people have anything to say that could be worthwhile,because they can't...The only real candidate that has some traction is Lieberman..Here though is his problem,he is just too nice of a guy and the most conservative of the whole bunch..Now you have John Kerry,who's only rhetoric has been his service record (impressive) from the 60's and is just taking all the mileage can from that..Kerry is more like Al Gore in the way that he doesn't know when to stay on course,but rather formulates his sphere when time and terms dictate,way too wishy-washy...No point in going down the list of the others,they don't stand a chance or have the national exposure to ever hoping getting some attention.

Now that the actual war in Irag has ended and nation building has now become the front criticism for Democrats that not enough is being done..Looters,rogue marauders and such are now the blame that Bush didn't have an exit strategy...You just can't win in a election cycle with the opposing party..Before the war started,they were exponding on the possibility of thousands of civilians and service men and women would be killed and we would be in a quagmire for years..The first proved false and second probably will not be so lengthy,but they are not able to come out and say that Bush with the expertise of Tommy Franks and Rummy, that they did an excellent job,they just continue to move on with more absurd and unwarranted criticism.

Democrats have never been strong in foreign affairs and Clinton's tenure showed that..His involvement on the Middle Eastern situation was more on selfserving and getting the Noble Peace prize (he actually had a consulting agency formulate a plan on how he could get that nomination) than the real meaning for lasting peace.. Osuma Bin Laden is another issue that Clinton screwed up..Yemen had Osuma in their grips,but Clinton didn't want him because that would've disrupted Saudi Arabia and felt that could also undermind his poll rating here at home based from a strong economy..Incidentally,the economy was already in his last quarter in office, showing signs of decline.Let's understand one thing about how you Democrats are always harping that Clinton created the greatest economic boom in modern times is nonsense..The economic boom was created by capital gains reduction during Reagan that created the technological boom in the 90's...For Democrats to blame Bush for the unemployment of workers,is false as well..In any given presidency, it usually takes about 9 months for any legislation that is inacted to take effect...They blame Bush's first tax cut for the failing economy,of which 70% of this was backloaded going out 5-10 years..Democrats can only hope that they spread phony arguments to their flock,knowing very well that most are just going along without real understanding how it really is..Democrats prefer a non-thinking do as your told band of followers and we will take care of you mentality ideology,rather than smaller government and taxes and let's not forget mind your own business,they hate that..

One real hypocritical Democratic stand that they always seem to agree on is education and health care..Up until 1994,the Democrats held congress for almost 50 years and absolutely didn't do anything for education and health care but flush money down that toilet only to pacify the teachers union and the medicare program that reeks with corruption and complete out of control spending...Now look at our education system and the monies it gets...Democrats don't deserve to manage anything when it comes to your mony...Here they blame Bush for the disarray of education and not a real proposal for medicare..First,medicare needs to be completely dismantled and started over and the education system needs to be controled at the local level with parents taking an active roll in decision making process and out of the hands of bureaucrats in Washington.

This week Bush is overseas and will start mending fences that became what was known as French bashing and rightfully so..Bush has come around to the Russians and the Germans,but France isn't going to be so lucky and the fallout for their global selfserving campaign to gain rally support against the US is still very much on Americans minds and will be for sometime...

The judicial process is another real concern among Democrats..They are absolutely livid with discontempt for Bush's nominees.The last few years Democrats demanded an up or down vote on judicial nominees by Clinton,but now that Republicans control both houses and it is a sure bet that the nominees would gain support,even from some moderate Democrats,they won't even hear of presenting a floor vote on this issue..Yep real hypocrites.

Conservatisim is real and strong and with most beliefs of Americans,which I think are moderate,Democrats have a real hurdle to overcome and if they want the White House,it will never happen in 04,but they may have a chance in 08...Forget Hillary,she's too polorizing of a figure and is unelectable..

Come join our party,we will allow you to think independently...


You all have a great day

ET



http://www.waydago.com Waydago Internet Marketing System

 

[Chanman]

Thanks for posting as I like to read all the commentary:weed:

 

[djv]

One number in that artical was given out wrong. Over 7 million out of work not 4 million. I agree if things pick up he should win. If not I have to rethink it. And forsure if he starts kissing France ass and forgiveing them. I will vote against Bush. France was and still could be abigger threat to us then Iraq ever was.
Keep in mind some of this break will not come into play till next year. Those at 26000 or less wil see zero or very little of any break. They would spend it faster then anyone because they need to. And those at 65 and older. So many need any kind of help get zero. Yes if some have some stocks they catch a small break there. But again some of that comes next year. Hard to undestand why they would leave out 20% of the population. Hey I hope it works im doing great by it. But Im going to do like most that will do great by it. Save it to pay for the tax hike my state is droping on me, and the property tax jump.
And meanwhile the national deficit goes higher. Sooner or later we pay for that to. Cant keep stealing from the S S fund forever. Soon there will be nothing left to steal from.

 

[ferdville]

Those making 26k or less per year seldom pay any taxes after all is said and done. How do you give back what they have never paid? I know alot of people who most would consider republican, conservative, etc - and there are not that many, myself included, that are real thrilled with Bush. I supported his Iraq endeavour and many other things, but I don't see that he has a solid plan for the future. That is disturbing to me. He seems to do things on an "as needed" basis without preparing for long term solutions. All that being said, the dems have absolutely nothing to make a run at Bush with. Al Sharpton? It is a weak group that will have little chance of dethroning Bush unless he makes a huge mistake. It is reminiscent of the horrendous situation we have in California now. Almost anyone with a pulse could have defeated Gov. Davis. But republicans tossed aside a sure winner in Riordan for an unknown, ill prepared, quasi-buffon named Simon. And he still almost beat Davis. Maybe it is my old age, but this country could use some new blood from somewhere.

 

[StevieD]

Ferdville, I couldn't agree with you more. At this point the dems don't seem to have anything. It would really be nice to see some new blood come in from somewhere.
In my opinion Bush has been a complete failure. Outside of toppling two countries by using billions of dollars of weapons against their non-existant military, he hasn't done much. Afaghanastan is still in shambles and I will give him the benefit of the doubt and say it is too early to say anything about Iraq but it doesn't look good over there.
There are possible scandals with Halliburton brewing and he better hurry up and plant some WMD over there for us to find or he is going to face another scandal.
That being said he has done a good job of painting anybody who disagrees with him as some kind of a traitor. There is even some of that in the article that started this topic. About how dems hope people are standing in soup lines or some such nonsense. Just because someone challenges him for President doesn't mean they hope the worst for the country. Was he hoping the economy would tank when he ran against an incumbent VP? If he was maybe that would explain why a republican, Greenspan, raised intrest rates 4 times in a row, during the campaign, to slow down the economy that he hasn't been able to start up even with too many intrest rate declines in a row to count. But that is fodder for another thread.

 

[ryson]

To the card holding dems/libs - whatever you like to be called. There is a lack of rain in the US. suprised I have not seen you blame Bush for that too:shrug:

 

[StevieD]

Actually Ryson I thought that was Clinton's fault like everything else. Everyone knows you can't blame the current President for weather patterns that were obviouly formed under the old administration. All though there does seem to be a lot of hot air blowing out of Washington these days. ( Old George Carlin joke actually) Only good stuff is to be charged to the current guyl ......I'm still thinking but there must be something good?:shrug:

 

[Turfgrass]

Here is some more bad news for you Bush haters.

Asked on a recent Fox News/Opinion Dynamics poll if they wanted a tax cut and how large it should be, only 20 percent of the sample opted for the full $750 billion recommended by the president.

But the issue in 2004 won't be whether to cut taxes - it will be whether to raise them, by letting the cut expire. And any poll asking if voters want a tax increase will find huge majorities saying, "No way!"

Accordingly, Bush won't accuse his rivals of opposing the tax cut. Rather, he'll charge that they want a tax hike.

In the language of electoral politics, that is the equivalent of supporting murder, rape and arson. The last candidate who ran promising to raise taxes was Walter Mondale in 1984 - who lost in a landslide.

Bush will happily tick off the tax "increases" his rival supports by refusing to extend the tax cuts past the sunset.

How can a Democrat oppose expanding the child-tax credit, lowering the tax rates on the two lowest brackets and repealing of the marriage penalty?

You can't win on that platform in November. But a candidate who doesn't embrace it in the primaries won't get nominated.

 

[StevieD]

No doubt that Bush will push his so called tax cut. Also no doubt the Murdoch Media will support it. And also Bush probably will win a re-election with the support of Murdoch Media. But that doesn't make it right. While he is cutting taxes my home town is talking about adding $600 to the property taxes of everyone in the city. This to make up for State funds which are not coming in because the Federal Funds won't be coming in. So he can call it a tax cut if he likes but really all he is doing is robbing Peter to pay Paul. The irony is that Peter needs the money more than Paul does.
But I agree Bush should win easily as long as he doesn't piss off Murdoch.

 

[ryson]

StevieD,

We had a tax thread a few months ago and I asked you to bring your data to the table. I posted mine but you did not, please bring some solid data to the table. Grab you sack and take some ownership instead of blaming other people. Belive it or not you do have the power to take control of your life.

regards

 

[StevieD]

Sorry Ryson if I offended you but what numbers would you like. What numbers are we talking about? The numbers of how during the 90's investors had no problem investing in the stock market without these dividend cuts? Numbers that show rich people pay more taxes than poor people I think I can do that. In fact
I posted on how with this tax cut Warren Buffet will pay about 3% tax, by his own figures, while those making far less will pay far more. Numbers can be skewed to show anything you want.

 

[Turfgrass]

It seems that almost every newspaper I pick up has some story in it about local governments raising either property taxes or sales taxes. These governments went on spending sprees during the heady days of the dot-com boom, and now they just can't bring themselves to cancel some of those nifty new spending programs they instituted. The answer -- the only answer -- to these budget problems is simply to raise taxes.

Remember -- if you run into budget problems you have three options. You can work harder to earn more money, you can cut your spending, or you can borrow some money and pay it back later. Not so for governments. When politicians figure out that they've spent themselves into a budget crunch they don't have to cut spending. They don't have to do anything to actually earn the extra money they need. If politicians need more money they simply step up to you and TAKE IT. This is the power that comes from being a part of the only entity that can use deadly force to accomplish its goals. With President Bush's tax cut at the federal level these local hacks feel even more emboldened ... after all, you have all that extra money now, don't you?

What can we do? Well, we can vote these big tax-and-spenders out, can't we? The problem is, they're probably using that money they took from someone else to do something nice for YOU! So you aren't likely to vote them out of office.

 

[StevieD]

From The New York Times, 5/9/03:
http://nytimes.com/2003/05/09/opinion/09KRUG.html

Into the Sunset

By PAUL KRUGMAN

The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities estimates that the true
cost of the House bill, without the sunset scam, would be $1.1
trillion over the next decade.

You know, $550 billion here, $550 billion there, and pretty soon
you're talking real money.

The new tax cut plan echoes the 2001 scam in other ways.

In 2001 a tax cut that delivered about 40 percent of its benefits to
the richest 1 percent of families was marketed as a tax break for
ordinary folks.

The same is true this time.

In fact, the extent to which the House bill favors the rich is
breathtaking: the typical family would get a tax break of only $217
next year, but families with incomes above $1 million would get an
average of $93,500 each.

The center estimates that over the next decade, 27 percent of the tax
cut -- about the share that goes to the bottom 90 percent of the
population -- would go to these very high-income families, who
comprise a mere 0.13 percent of the population.

Finally, as in 2001, we're being told that this tax cut will create
lots of jobs.

But why should we believe that?

It's hard to find an independent economist who thinks that the Bush
proposal would create the 1.4 million jobs claimed by the
administration -- and as I've explained in this column, even that many
jobs would be a poor payoff for a tax cut that big.

And bear in mind that Bush-style tax cuts now have a track record.

Of the 2.1 million jobs lost over the past two years, 1.7 million
vanished after the passage of the 2001 tax cut.

Nonetheless, the odds are that this scam, like the scam of 2001, will
succeed.

The tax cut will be passed, and the budget will plunge even deeper
into the red.

And one day we'll realize that international investors are treating us
like a banana republic -- that they won't finance our trade deficit
unless they are paid very high rates of interest (have I mentioned
that the dollar has just fallen to a four-year low against the euro?)
-- and everyone will wonder why.

 

[Turfgrass]

You must be kidding be...you don't put any stock into what that fish wrapper says now do you?

 

[StevieD]

Turf! LOL!!!! But any port in a storm.

 

[djv]

The states had to dig deep in these last two years of the Bush
economic slowdown. Some say dam near recession. Many have there surplus used and had to go into the hole. States have to, at least many do. Have a balanced buget. So I cant say they all been over spending. Thats to easy of a statement. And more or less BS. So yes folks save those tax cuts if you got any. The states and the USA government will be taxing you more. And it it's gone before you can spend it. The USA will get you with special taxes and new fees. They wont call them taxes. No one does. But they are. Little things like go to a national park and wow they doubled the fee. Those of you that like your Cig's and Bear & Wine they all get a kick. Military bonuses to re-up are going to be lowered. There were some nice ones out there. As high as 30000 grand if you stay 4 more years and have the right rank. So there are always way to screw folks. I like the slashing there doing to the Vet's. These are same guys Bush wants to hang out with. Have his pitcure taken with. Wait till they all know they been screwd with.

 

[StevieD]

DJV, funny but during Vietnam he didn't want to hang with them. But oh my how they like to rewrite history!

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

Can't believe this economy stuff again. I will ask this question for the nth time and still waiting for an answer.
What did Clinton do to have any impact on economy?WHAT?
Did he invent the dot.com boom that gave us the biggest tax revenue in history?
Don't tell me he put revenue from selling secrets to china,revenue he charged for his little bread and breakfast club at the whitehouse,kick backs for pardoning crimnals on ten most wanted list,sale of Whitehouse furnishing when he left office back into the economy. Those went in his pocket.
Just name 1 thing that he did that had anything to do with economy.
---and as far as economy now,take into consideration 911 and 2 wars in 3 years, I could see things MUCH worse. With that being said I do not agree with tax cuts at this particular time but am no econmics whiz by any sense of imagination.

 

[djv]

Strange as it maybe. He got us started on the cycle of lower the interest rates. With a tax increase of all things. This to help get government a surplus. Something not heard of in last 40 some years. And some how his program that gave those manufacturing outfits big breaks from Uncle Sam. If they hired and expaned jobs in the USA. Dam near put us all back to work. You never get everyone back. There is about 2.6% that never worked and never will. They will let you and I pay for there needs.
But some how it worked very well. It was a mess when he got there. Higer interest rates. Almost 5% unemployed. We need some new thinking again. Some times just doing tax cuts dont help. Incentives to earn those cuts do. This last cut does not inspire any manufacturer to expand. Yes it will give some more money in there pocket. But they may put it away.
Hey Mr Bush does something to turn it around he will get the raves. But it always has been. He who is there gets the chit with the good. I have friends that told me when he got elected. Dave put lots of your 401k into bonds and balanced funds. Remember his Dad. I did and still took a 35 grand hit. I have other long time friends that said no way. He will do great job. They lost more then half. May take them 6 to 8 years to get it back. We must remember this is the group in the white house that wants everyone to split there SS plan in to the stock market. Im glad that plan was not in place last two years. No one would be able to retire. And that would just make job market even worse. They better rethink that plan and fill it with tons of safe guards. Im pulling for him. I want more folks working and more cash in the pocket. But I dont want us to leave to many behind with big time greed. We need more folks in jobs that pay taxes. Thats help you and me to. We need to stop jumping into fire fights. Lets spend more of it here at home to really make us all more secure. By doing this we will create more jobs for many. Hey if he cant cut it I take my vote someplace else. He's got another 18 months to show us some thing other then what we seen so far. Lots of gun fire. Very little milk and butter.

 

[StevieD]

That was a great post DJV. Not only did it answer DTB's question but it was well written and well thought out.