Posted on 02/04/2004 10:39:26 PM PST by jmstein7
Blame Clinton!
If you're like me, then you're sick and tired of Kerry and his Democrat cohorts lying out of their pie-holes, blaming President Bush for a recession (and the consequential job losses) that CLINTON caused. The polls that show Kerry ahead cite the reason as "Bush cost us too many jobs." So, we can reverse that perception by merely getting the truth out -- and impeaching the Democrats' credibility in the process.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1071821/posts
The death-drop of the stock market did not begin with the Bush administration in January 2001, says the congressional Joint Economic Committee (JEC), but in March 2000 under the Clinton administration when it began its all-out attack on the entrepreneurs of the booming U.S. high-tech industry. Indeed, The Economist reports that this poisoning of the economic stream even may have begun in the late 1990s. According to JEC Chairman Rep. Jim Saxton, "The 2000 NASDAQ collapse also corroborates a variety of other data indicating that a sharp economic slowdown was under way by the middle of 2000."
The JEC also found that job losses began under Clinton as well:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1071825/posts
Virtually all of the net payroll job loss in recent years is accounted for by the manufacturing sector, and this decline in factory jobs began before the current Administration took office, Vice Chairman Jim Saxton said today. Opponents of the Administration have repeatedly claimed that its policies have caused the decline in manufacturing employment, but fail to explain how this trend began long before any changes in policy took place. The facts show that manufacturing employment reached a cyclical peak in 1998, trending downward thereafter. Consecutive monthly declines in manufacturing employment began in 2000. Moreover, manufacturing employment has been trending downward over a much longer period.
Despite the facts, Kerry and the Democrats continue to lie to the public -- and the media dutifully repeats their lies. Well, in the age of the internet, this will not stand!
Here is what YOU can do to get the word out:
1) Write A letter to the editor
Open the "Write for W" window by clicking HERE.
Write a letter to your editor denouncing Kerry and the Democrats for lying to the American people, blaming Bush for Clinton's sins and failures. For some more ideas, click here. Otherwise, here is a sample letter that you can use, edit, etc.
John Kerry and the Democrats have lied to the American people for too long. It has now been firmly established that the economic recession, and job loss, began while Bill Clinton was still in office -- but despite the facts, Kerry and the Democrats lie and blame Bush. This is outrageous.
On December 10, 2003, the congressional Joint Economic Committee released its official study showing that the recession began in the third quarter of 2000. Bill Clinton was still in office.
On January of 2004, the congressional Joint Economic Committee released it official study showing that the job loss that Democrats would like to pin on Bush began in July of 2000. Bill Clinton was still in office.
The fact is, the recession and job loss began on Bill Clinton's watch. President Bush inherited an economy that Bill Clinton destroyed. It is grossly disingenuous -- a flat-out lie -- for Kerry and the Democrats to blame Bush.
Make sure to put your ZIP CODE in the box at the top; then go ahead and SEND your letter!
Also, email the above sample to Brit Hume (he likes to get to the bottom of these things). Email Brit at:
2) Contact the RNC NRSC and Talk Radio and demand that they get the word out.
Email the RNC this story (or call or write them) and tell them to get this important fact out!
Republican National Committee | 310 First Street, SE | Washington, DC 20003
Phone: 202.863.8500 | Fax: 202.863.8820 | E-mail: info@gop.com
NRSC (National Republican Senatorial Committee)
| Ronald Reagan Republican Center | 425 2nd Street NE | Washington DC 20002 | 202.675.6000
http://www.nrsc.org/nrscweb/feedback/
Also, email Rush ( rush@eibnet.com ) and Hannity ( Hannity@foxnews.com ) and get the word out!
Call Rush at 1-800-282-2882
Call Hannity at 1-800-941-7326
4) Email O'Reilly the above story - he's wishy/washy these days, but he still likes to run stories like this about LIES.
Send the following (or your own letter) to oreilly@foxnews.com
Dear Bill,
John Kerry and the Democrats have lied to the American people for too long. It has now been firmly established that the economic recession, and job loss, began while Bill Clinton was still in office -- but despite the facts, Kerry and the Democrats lie and blame Bush. This is outrageous.
On December 10, 2003, the congressional Joint Economic Committee released its official study showing that the recession began in the third quarter of 2000. Bill Clinton was still in office.
On January of 2004, the congressional Joint Economic Committee released it official study showing that the job loss that Democrats would like to pin on Bush began in July of 2000. Bill Clinton was still in office.
The fact is, the recession and job loss began on Bill Clinton's watch. President Bush inherited an economy that Bill Clinton destroyed. It is grossly disingenuous -- a flat-out lie -- for Kerry and the Democrats to blame Bush.
Please go over the heads of the pinheads in the media and get the truth out to the people!
Thank you!
YOUR NAME
YOUR CITY, STATE
5) Email ALL your friends this page and tell them to write, call, fax, etc. This is too important an issue to remain silent on any longer.
If you think of any other action that FReepers can take, please post it to this thread.
Thanks!
You could add "will-never-GET-reported"
The problem goes way back before 1998. It got it's start back during Nixon's administration. It can't really be blamed on any administration or party though. It's pretty much a bi-partisan sort of thing. Reagan was the only one I ever recall openly opposing it. He described a service economy as everybody making a living by taking in each others laundry, if I recall correctly.
Not true, but if it were: Out of work chimpanzees do not require you to pay taxes to provide for their welfare benefits; And working chimpanzees do not pay taxes on $25.00 an hour incomes.
BTW, what to you do that couldn't be done just as well by cheaper foreign labor, foreign companies, or chimpanzees? And what is the real source of your employment (the consumers of your labor) Americans whom you want to put out of work, or lower their wages, or foreigners?
I was referring to the tech stock market bubble of recent years. An undeniable event, IMO.
Yes, those companies are still going concerns, and most are good companies with great futures, Amazon being a possible exception.
The stocks of at least 2 on your list, Nortel and Cisco, were bid up so far in excess of realistic value, that shareholders in these companies lost literally millions of dollars when the bubble burst. Most of that has not yet been recovered.
However, I agree with you that the tech revolution is here to stay, barring Muslim takeover of civilization. I find it exciting and fascinating too, and am sure that tech companies at some point, probably soon, will be where the money is.
EVERYbody wanted on that train - so much so, they were willing to pay richly in hopes that something, even something on the periphery (like a grocery.com) might turn out to be the 'winning' fad.
A few laters, after the dust has settled, we see a little more clearly. THOSE with good business plans, those that found a market for their products or services survived ... those were the days of a lot of new internet 'product' offerings; like on-line trading. I personnally enjoyed beta-testing some real-time stock-quote software from Datek - and support via e-mail was quick during that period (original developers still around/on staff)!
Right Bill Clinton; and is suspect he went after them for preci$ely that. . .and then the damn broke.
Slowing it and stopping it are two different things and Greenspan should have known that the price of oil going from $10 a barrel to $40 a barrel would have slowed the economy down just fine without the interest rate hikes. Although they happened concurrently I couldn't believe it at the time that Greenspan couldn't see what we were headed for. I am no economist and I did.
The questions now are, have Bush's economic policies mitigated or exacerbated the recession?
Mitigated it without question
Are budget deficits of no concern or a growing danger for the economy?
Short term no problem, long term if we don't arrest them in time our economy will collapse as did the USSR's
Will more tax cuts improve or worsen our economic future?
I have come to believe that tax cuts will always help an ailing economy, it is social spending that always causes economic collapse where ever they have been abused. What we have to decide as Americans is do we want to cripple our economy by financing inefficient safety nets as has Canada, England and other increasingly socialist countries.
Many of these things I have written about on my Citizens For A Freer America website however in 1998 when I wrote much of it I wasn't a tax cut advocate but now the advantages have been demonstrated to me and I have been converted.
Daryl L. Hunter - Editor |
In related articles from the same period and available from the same online news source, Yamani said, "the stone age didn't end because people ran out of stones." He then cited increases in proven reserves (20 fold since 1973), and technological developments including fuel cells. Yamani is a commoner, and his title is an honorarium from the King.Saudis finally balance budgetAfter 15 years of deficits, Saudi Arabia has used its soaring oil revenues to balance the kingdom's budget. For its 2000 budget, based on an oil price of $19 a barrel, Riyad had forecast a $7.4 billion deficit. Instead, the price of oil hovered around $35 for much of the year.
thanks to oil price bonanza
Wednesday, December 20, 2000Yamani predicts oil price of $10The former Saudi Arabian oil minister Sheikh Ahmed Zaki Yamani has predicted that oil prices will crash from current levels of around $30 a barrel to $10 by the end of 2001.
Sunday 25 June 2000
by Sophie Barker
"I would be happy if I am wrong, but I know, as surely as ABC, that it is coming," Sheikh Yamani said in an interview in the forthcoming edition of Forbes Global magazine. His most recent comment comes almost two years after oil prices last plunged to $10. Since 1998, they have steadily risen, reaching $35 a barrel this year.
P.J. O'Rourke's commentary in the June 2002 Automobile (pp 56-57, "If We're At War, Why Is Gasoline So Cheap") wasn't online last I checked, but here's a quick quote:Saudi Arabia Signs Gas AgreementSaudi Arabia signed agreements with nine international oil companies Sunday . . . involves the development of three natural gas fields in the kingdom, and a number of related power plants, transmission pipelines and water desalinization projects. Saudi Oil Minister Ali al-Naimi said the companies are expected to profit on returns from the exploration and development of gas fields by more than 15 percent of the investment cost. Al-Faisal said in if the companies discover oil, they will be compensated and the fields will be repossessed by Saudi Arabia.
October 2001
The Associated PressInside OPEC's Surprise CutOPEC surprised the market last week by announcing a 900,000 barrel a day reduction in quotas, effective November 1. The announcement quickly boosted spot oil prices, which jumped $0.89 a barrel to $28.02... OPEC's decision offsets the action taken at the April OPEC meeting, when quotas were raised by 900,000 barrels a day effective June 1 (although the organization announced a simultaneous 2 million barrel-a-day cut in production at that time). However, since June, production by the OPEC 10 -- those OPEC countries that have quotas -- has risen by 70,000 barrels a day, to 25.8 million barrels. Including Iraq, production has risen by 640,000 barrels a day, to an estimated 26.9 million barrels... Through August, only Venezuela (which is still suffering the effects of the oil workers strike) and Indonesia are in compliance with current quotas... [W]orld oil supply exceeds fourth-quarter 2003 demand by about 1.1 million barrels a day. OPEC production, meanwhile, is expected to rise further in September -- owing to increased Iraqi production, which has risen to approximately 1.5 million barrels a day... All this boils down to a lower barrel price, which could be $18 for the full-year 2004. Of course, a sharp fall in oil prices will be bad for oil stocks, but good for the broader market.
by Frederick P. Leuffer
September 29, 2003, 8:30 a.m.
[G]asoline, some recent price hikes notwithstanding... adjusted for inflation... was the lowest gasoline price, ever... [I]n 1970, we imported 22.7 per cent of our crude oil. Now we import 59 per cent, and almost a third comes from the Middle East... U.S. oil consumption went from more than 20 million barrels a day in August 2001 to about 18.8 million a day in January 2002... But the best thing we have going for us at the gas pump is the no-account, bone-idle, useless bums sitting on 65 per cent of the world's oil... [T]he total nonpetrochemical exports of the Arab world do not equal Finland's.This one came from AOL, so no URL:
As P.J. O'Rourke pointed out, gas prices are lower now (adjusted for inflation) than they have ever been. In 1973/74, "price gouging" led to $1.50 a gallon here and there. Price gouging was of course entirely imaginary. In 1963 my family bought a brand new Plymouth Belvidere (hey, it had a 318 ci V8, and would whip the ass of most production cars today) for less than $3000. That was just the second brand new car we ever had.Record Jump for Gas PricesThe survey of 8,000 service stations on Friday showed an average of all grades of gasoline, including taxes, reached $1.7484 a gallon, just short of the survey's all-time high weighted average of $1.7608 set last March 21, analyst Trilby Lundberg said Sunday... Phoenix had the highest leap in the nation during the two-week period, with prices jumping 60.42 cents a gallon for self-serve regular. On Aug. 22, self-serve regular averaged $2.1425, the highest price in the nation for that grade. By comparison, the lowest price for that grade was in Charleston, S.C., where the average for self-serve regular was $1.4920. Temporary refinery shutdowns caused by the massive East Coast/Midwest blackout combined with a break in a major pipeline in Arizona to cause the supply disruptions, Lundberg said. However, the reopening of the pipeline and the end of the blackout means gas prices should fall thanks to the traditional decline in demand in September and an influx of imported gasoline attracted by the current high prices, she said.
AP
8-25-03 0750EDT
You know how a lot of partisans continually bitch about GWB's oil buddies? I really do have to laugh... [thanks, ValerieUSA, for sending this a while back]Hydrogen's Dirty SecretBy launching an ambitious program to develop what he calls the "Freedom Car," Bush seemed determined to realize the kind of future that hydrogen-car supporters have envisioned for years. Using existing technology, hydrogen can be easily and cleanly extracted from water. Electricity generated by solar panels and wind turbines is used to split the water's hydrogen atoms from its oxygen atoms. The hydrogen is then recombined with oxygen in fuel cells, where it releases electrons that drive an electric motor in a car.
by Barry C. Lynn
May/June 2003 Issue
How Marc Rich made billions from Nigeria's OilMarc Rich is the most controversial businessman in the U.S. today. In a nutshell, he has been making waves here in the U.S. following insinuations by right wing activists and other Clinton critics that Rich, through some sleek ways, "bought" his January 2001 presidential pardon via his former wife, Denise Rich. Denise has made donations to the President Bill Clinton Library in Arkansas and more than $600,000 to Democratic Party causes in recent years. Clinton also attended numerous fundraisers hosted by Denise. Another issue which reflects the audacious resolve and strategic ways of the 66-years old Mr. Rich is that he hired, shall I simply say, "the best attorney for the job" of getting the Clinton pardon, Washington D.C.-based attorney Jack Quinn (who recently served as President Clinton's lawyer). Quinn delivered.
Mr. Rich's ignoble support for the apartheid regime in South Africa places his aggressive business legacy on the wrong side of history. Speaking of legacy, I really doubt that Rich really cares about more than making big bucks, here and there... [O]ur community and readers should know about the millions of unpaid royalties and misleading declarations he made in the Nigerian oil and gas business through his numerous deals with soldier-businessmen-politicans who ran Nigeria into an economic stupor.[I]n August of 1999, three months after taking office, President Obasanjo's government announced 16 crude oil contracts to replace the 41 approved under previous military governments. Remarkably, the controversial international businessman Marc Rich "survived" the overhaul of the established international crude oil trading houses who dominated Nigeria's exports. They were called the "magnificent seven."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.