Look for the “No Labels” label.
It sounds to me like Radosh is working for one of Sarah's opponents in 2012. Does he belong to Mitt?
They are doing what they always do -- lying to us about who they are.
Dionne is a complete partisan hack. Back in 1993 when Clinton pushed that unnecessary tax and spend scheme—which included a $20 billion “stimulus package” (ie midnight basketball pork)......Dionne argued that this was Keynesian economics and claimed that the stimulus package was ESSENTIAL to making the Clinton plan work.....but of course the Bob Dole-led Senate shot down the “stimulus”.
But Democrats take credit for the success of the Clinton years anyway...despite the fact that they didn’t even GET the spending side of the tax and spend scheme!!!!
Clinton’s plan was a joke to anybody who knows what Keynesian economics is, anyway.....It sure is NOT a trillion tax increase plus a measly $20 billion spending—which isn’t big enough to move a multi-trillion dollar economy.....plus...by the time Clinton took office in 1993, the economy had grown about 3.5% in 1992...and had accelerated to over 4% GDP growth by 1993—which was Clinton’s first year....Clinton inherited a good economy and a falling Fed Funds interest rate.....which fell from 9% to 3% in 4 years of George H W Bush...down from 20% when Reagan took office.
Here’s the REAL deal......in the waning months of the Carter presidency, the Fed Funds rate was raised from 12% to 20% just so that Reagan would inherit a recession....
Then George HW Bush got greeted by the Fed raising the Fed Funds rate to 9% as he took office.....
and W Bush got a Fed Funds rate raised to 6.5% causing a recession as HE took office in 2001...but for Clinton......he got a Fed Funds rate lowered to 3% as he took office....and that, my friends-—is why so many jobs were created in the Clinton years.......plus, because inflation fell in the 1990s and the Berlin Wall fell—the Federal government could hold spending down...but that ended on 9-11-01.
Anyway...when W Bush became president...all the Democrats said that the Bush tax cuts were “Keynesian” and declared that Keynesian economics was dead, but also insisted in 2001 that Clinton was NOT a Keynesian—even though they were saying he WAS a Keynesian in 1993......
Now that Bush is no longer in office, now here comes the rebirth of Keynesian tax and spend economics again!!!!
For the record...Keynes argued for DEMAND side economics—either big across the board tax cuts or big tax increases, then spending the whole tax increase on public works projects......Dems pretend that tax cuts are not Keynesian, but they are....and they also pretend that borrow and spend schemes are Keynesian, when they are NOT.....and they also pretend that spending pays for itself, but tax cuts always cost maximal revenues........
Anyone that can confuse Dionne with a centrist is drinking some strong Kool Aid..
There is NO such thing as a conservative Washington Post columnist.
They forgot how to be objective decades ago.
Morning Kaslin
What I find curious is the fact that so many liberals shy away from calling themselves what they are. They call themselves progressives or even more absurdly moderates. These are people who are trying to change the entire social dynamic of the country to something Caligula would be proud of. In contrast, I don’t know any conservatives who deny they are conservatives. They’re proud of it.