You've heard the stories for years now. How in eight years of President Ronald Reagan, the national debt tripled, the poor got poorer, and the rich got richer. How Bill Clinton inherited "The worst economy is 40 years" from President George H. W. Bush. All lies, but sucked up by press/media, liberal economists and daytime brain dead shows like Regis & What's-her-name, Good Morning America, and Oprah Winfools..
In actual fact, the Reagan years produced the strongest economic growth since the roaring 20's, saw more people jump UP income brackets than at ANY time in our history, and created more jobs than in ANY 8 year cycle EVER. Yes, the federal debt did triple, but actually dropped as a percentage of GDP, and don't forget, Reagan WAS handed one of the worst economies in our history, with 20% interest rates, gas lines, and rabid inflation. Yet in just 8 years he reversed it all, WHILE defeating the threat of Communist obliteration of our country, and having to deal with a Democratic Congress that just couldn't stop spending. Now that's MR. REAGAN'S legacy Mr. Clinton, unfortunately, yours will be more along the lines of scandal, sex, lies, drugs, draft-dodging, Monica and of course, ...IMPEACHMENT.
Here's what you NEVER hear from the liberal media: The first 2 years of Clinton/Gore DOUBLED the federal debt, even though they were handed a growing economy, a peacetime dividend, and an information revolution that would dramatically increase productivity.
As you now know, it's not a "Clinton Boom" we're enjoying, but a continuation of President Ronald Reagan's boom. Even George H.W. Bush endorsed what he had previously called "Voodoo Economics" after Reagan proved to us that it worked. Reagan's historic economy actually continues to grow with us to this day, only briefly interrupted by two large tax increases. (Econ 101 for liberals: "Economic boom, interrupted by tax increases.") As shown in the famous graph occasionally published in The Wall Street Journal, a mild recession brought on when President Bush was forced by the Democrats in Congress to break his "No new taxes" pledge more than recovered in the fourth year of his term. In fact, Clinton would never match the economic growth President Bush left him until the Republicans took over the Congress and started reversing his liberal tax-and-spend policies. That bears repeating: Clinton would NEVER match the economic growth President Bush left him until the Republicans took over the Congress and started reversing his liberal tax-and-spend policies. The incredible market run up and period of economic growth was slowed under the first two years of the Clinton administration, due to the largest tax increase in history, and the first one that was ever retro-active. (Clinton actually had the audacity to tax people for a period of time when he WASN'T EVEN PRESIDENT!) Other poor fiscal policies inspired by the liberals within the Clinton team contributed to the Clinton downturn.
Here's the graph:
As Mr. Peabody would say, "Sherman, set the way-back machine to 1992." Clinton has just been inaugurated, and has appointed his liberal friends to the treasury and economic advisory board. In order to pay for their huge increases in government spending programs, and keep the largest tax increase in history from being even larger, Clinton goons must "Cook" the books and make some hair-brained accounting moves to make the national debt APPEAR smaller.
How you ask? Let us count the ways.
By swapping long term treasury notes at higher interest rates for short term notes at lower government paid interest rates.
Now, this works as long as the economy stay up and interest rates stay low. But if the short term notes come due after interest rates go up, then the government has to sell new notes (borrow) at the higher interest rates. Remember Ross Perot bagging on Clinton for short-term financing our national debt? The liberal media just ignored him.
Think of it this way. You are financing a house and the interest rates are lower than they have ever been. Do you go for the long term note or the five year variable? Of course you lock in the long term rate!
Unless you're Slick Willie, and know that you won't be in office in eight years, so who cares? And in fact, it would make Slick look even better if the economy did well while HE was in office, and poorly after HE left. Too much to ask? Not if you go for the lower short term rates to reduce your deficit and forego the long term security and increased financial market stability you could have had with the only slightly higher long term note rates. Almost like buying a house on your credit card. Guess what? That's EXACTLY what the scumbags did! Who care's about the country's future, it's all about me, me, me. Make the economy look good while I'm in, and ah, er, screw the next guy. What Bill Clinton would call a "Twofer."
How else did the Clintonistas "Reduce" the debt to increase spending on fabulous programs like Hillary's failed healthcare plan, Al Gore's favorite: Environmental impact study on cow farts, or "Midnight basketball??" (Simply an excuse for young thugs to be on the streets in the middle of the night, instead of home, getting a good night's rest so they can go to school, or WORK.)
How about looting the Social Security trust fund of the extra cash put in there to cover the retirement of the baby-boomers which starts in another 12 years? (Once again, AFTER Bill is long gone!) Yep, they did that too, and get this, they THEN had the audacity to claim that Republicans would destroy Social Security and put granny on the street if they were elected. Shame? No way, we're talking about the guy that dorked Monica.
Gutting our Armed Forces: Clinton brags about Al Gore "re-inventing" government, (Didn't Al invent it the first time?) and in the process, cutting 100,000 government jobs. What he fails to follow up with, is that number includes over 700,000 active duty Armed Forces personnel, and almost 300,000 Reserves who are no longer defending our country! In other words, he's INCREASED the size of "government" by 900,000 basically worthless workers, (the government was already screwed up) and cut our military. Sounds just like something Gore would do! More government spending, simply transferred from our military budget. And while we're on the subject of looting military spending, don't forget all those foreign trips, you know, like the ones Bill, Hill, Chelsea, Hillary's mom, (a real national security expert, chuckle, chuckle!) and ALL their friends went on to Africa, India, etc., etc.? Yep, you guessed it, literally hundreds of millions of dollars, ALL budgeted to "Military expenses." All while our troops live on food stamps, another Clinton first.
"Cooked books?" They hadn't even thawed them yet. Under Reagan and Bush, unemployment was measured by sending out about 60,000 "Household surveys" asking about employment. The "Chronically unemployed" were dropped from counting, defined THEN as three or four years of being out of a job. The Clinton regime dropped 9,000 surveys, mostly in inner cities where unemployment is much higher, then later trimmed the overall number to 50,000 - again avoiding inner cities. They then redefined the "Chronically unemployed" horizon down to ONE YEAR. BINGO! Instant record breaking unemployment and the lowest recorded unemployment for African-Americans in history. Wow, are we doing well or what!
What has to be remembered is that the reading of the economic speedometer (CPI, PPI, unemployment, etc) is done by the Clinton administration Department of Labor. Surely, no one is suggesting that Labor Secretary Alexis Hermann lied to make Slick Willie look good. (Ahem! Cough, cough! We're talking about someone who has a special prosecutor slowly proving she took bribes and lied about them!)
Fortunately for America, the GOP took the House and Senate in 1994, AFTER which, the market began its extraordinary rise. Again, that bears repeating. Bill Clinton had actually SLOWED the economy until....the GOP took the House and Senate in 1994, AFTER which, the market began its extraordinary rise.
Remember when Bill claimed "He was still relevant" after the Republicans took Congress? In actual fact, he has been totally irrelevant to our current economic boom. The only relevance he's had on the economy is when he briefly stunted a booming period of growth with his huge tax increase, massive federal spending, and terrible fiscal policies. Hey, at least he was getting laid.
"Amazingly" (dripping sarcasm now turned off) GOP-backed legislation such as the balanced-budget, reduction of deficit spending, welfare reform, etc., quickly reversed the Clinton mini-recession. (And probably got him re-elected, and certainly saved his @$$ from being the first President impeached and REMOVED from office.) While Greenspan contributed interest-rate moderation, Clinton simply went along for the ride, although, not willingly. He vetoed every one of the bills until public pressure forced him to sign them later. He basically went kicking and screaming, and you certainly remember his dire predictions when he signed them: "Poor people, the elderly, and (of course) women and children will be left cold, homeless and hungry." Now that none of that has actually happened, Slick claims these GOP successes as HIS administrations greatest accomplishments. Nerve? Hey, we're talking about Bill Clinton.
Now, flash forward to today. The liberal media is talking about the upcoming recession, as if, since a Republican was elected President, the bad times are back again. What their short-term-memory-loss-minds forget is that when Billy was handed the keys to the White House in 1993, the proclaimed Bush "Recession" of 1992 was suddenly termed an "Economic boom." Now, after 8 years of Slick Willie, GWB is being handed back that same "Recession." Folks, if you need to get your economic information from Tom Brokaw, Peter Jennings, Dan Blather (YUK!) or Bernard Shaw, you're not going to get the truth, but the good news is, for you, it doesn't matter.
ADDING today: And it looks like the GWB economy is humming right along, despite the stock market, terrorist attacks, (and not just the liberal Dems, I mean Osama's crowd!)and a stick-in-the-butt Senate that won't pass legilation.
