Here you go: http://www.govexec.com/story_page.cfm?articleid=27792&printerfriendlyVers=1& To save you the time: Most liberal voting record in the senate.
If you can't understand that this can be true, then hmmm is right. The one affect a president definitively can have on the economy is that of confidence. The people that I talked to were not confident that Bush would do the right things for the economy and as a result, they decided to lay people off. Direct cause and effect.
Your "reality" appears to be based on lies told by the administration and groups like the Swiftvets. If your "reality" is based on lies, then it really isn't reality, is it? I was happy with the way he handled 9/11 right up until he used exaggerated, twisted, or just plain false "intelligence," some of which seems to have been provided by a hostile government, to manipulate the public into supporting this war. Do you like the way he continues down the same path even when it has been shown to be the wrong one? Of course, when he said it, he also claimed that "by far the vast majority of my tax cut goes to those at the bottom," and he continued to cut taxes even after it had been shown to be ineffective at creating jobs (which was one of the big reasons he claimed that the tax cut was necessary). Then, he didn't rescind those tax cuts when he started two different wars, even after those actions proved to be FAR more expensive than he advertised. Which line do you think he is toeing and how is Bush any different? Bush toes the GOP party line and then forces his minions to march in lockstep with him. This is absolutely true. We should have explored every single diplomatic option before going ot war and Bush did not do that. We should have built up a real coalition and Bush did not do that. We should have let the UNSC declare Iraq in violation of the treaty, but Bush did not do that. Bush wasn't enough of a leader to convince the UN that action was necessary. He wasn't enough of a leader to build a real coalition like his father did. He wasn't enough of a leader to use his diplomatic team to resolve the situation without war. Bush should have rescinded his tax cuts to pay for the war. Never before in world history has there been a tax cut in time of war, much less a bold-faced giveaway to rich people. I believe Kerry, given that GWB has broken so many of the promises that he made on the campaign trail in 2000. No child left behind. By far the vast majority of my tax cuts go to those at the bottom. I will not engage in nation building. I am a compassionate conservative. etc. All promises that have proven to be untrue.
To save you some time the article is wrong. Or rather it's right for one incomplete year and wrong for Kerry's 20 year senate career. This is another of the GOP's dishonest distortions this year. Kerry does have a liberal record. I wish it was even more liberal. But it's not the most liberal voting record in the senate, as the Bush camp likes to claim. Why not just be honest? Why do the Bushies feel they have to resort to dishonesty to win? As a result they have many people actually believing the distortions they have put out.
I think you missed my point. You're telling me that a Presidential candidate who talks down the economy months before the election can actually affect the economy in a negative way? Does this scenario sound familiar? hint- there is a presidential election in a few months.
Ok so he is very liberal can we agree on that? Ok now tell me where the liberal party stands on defense and taxes. Now what is kerry saying he will do? Can you honestly say they line up? If not do you think Kerry has changed his stripes or just trying to get elected?
Yes, I think he can, especially once he gets elected. When GWB was campaigning, there was no recession, jobs weren't being lost, and despite the post bubble effects, the economy was doing OK. GWB helped to trash it by talking it down. Hint - There is a HUGE difference between Kerry's talk about the economy in that he uses facts and evidence. The other difference is that we HAVE lost jobs and, despite the administration braying the contrary, the economy is not that strong. Once Kerry is elected, things will turn around since Americans will know we have an effective leader after four years of right wing lunatic politics.
He is almost exactly as liberal as the guy who delivered the keynote speech at the RNC this year. Yes, they do. The Dems want an intelligent war on terror that aggressively seeks out terrorists and takes them out with the cooperation of our allies worldwide. As far as taxes, they want to reduce the deficit by reining in spending and ending the massive giveaways to the rich that Bush pushed through. They want to stop spending like drunken sailors (like the GOP has been spending for four years) and restore some fiscal sanity to Washington DC. The GOP sure doesn't seem interested in being fiscally conservative, in fact the only fiscal conservative in recent memory has been Clinton, who pushed through deficit reduction until we had a surplus that GWB then squandered. 9/11 changed everything, remember?
I don't know which quote is funnier. The first one in which andymoon declares that the post-bubble economy was 'doing OK', or the second in which he derides Bush for 'talking down' the economy. andymoon, tell me what happens to corporations when their cost of capital rises. Sorry, too technical for you. Tell me what happens to corporations when their stock price goes down or their credit rating deteriorates. Again, sorry, too technical for you. Let me try again. Tell me what happens when companies have less money. Is this a situation in which the economy is 'doing OK' as you put it? Let's cut to the chase. You have no idea what you are talking about. It's obvious. It's as if you didn't even pick up a newspaper in the years 2000 and 2001. Unreal. With regard to talking down the economy, I suppose you haven't been listening to the liberals for the past FOUR YEARS. Just use this board as a proxy. Every single economic post from the liberals is negative. Now you are here to chastise Bush for talking down the economy four years ago? -- something he didn't even do. Andy, it's hilarious. HILARIOUS.
I only opened this because I assumed you were responding to me. If you want to debate me, accept my challenge. Otherwise, you are yellow.
Nice response andy. I knew you wouldn't be able to defend yourself. I've explained why I'm not wasting my time by debating you. 1) You are not in my league. 2) We've been debating for 2 years, you haven't won a single one. Things aren't going to change. 3) Your behavior has been unacceptable and you have insulted me on a daily basis for quite some time. 4) What an incredible waste of time and resources 5) You're just not worth it.
Seriously, I'm sorry you lost your job. But I don't buy the theory that CEO's all over the country started sacking people because they were anticipating a Bush victory in the closest election in American history. You say you've talked to 3 different employers who have confirmed this? They really started canning people because Bush might get elected?? That dog don't hunt.
6) You are totally aware that even with the deck stacked in your favor, you would lose. I could easily "defend" myself, but with you it isn't even worth it unless you will agree to a structured, judged debate with something of value on the line. I threw down the gauntlet and you ran. I challenged you again and you threw a tantrum about how much better you are than me. You are obviously a coward or you would take me up on my challenge. That's OK, everyone sees your fear and knows it for what it is.
Actually, if you would read my post, you would find that I said "I personally heard at least three employers say that they were laying people off because Bush got elected." They were laying people off AFTER he got elected but before he took office because they knew that his policies would be a disaster and they were absolutely correct.
Boss: I'm sorry, Stan. We're going to have to let you go. Stan: What?? Why? Boss: Well you see, George W Bush won the election last week and in anticipation of all hell breaking loose, we're laying off thousands of employees. You know, just to be on the safe side. Stan: Damn you George W Bush...DAMN YOU TO HELL!!! I'm sorry man, I still don't buy it.
Of course you don't buy it, you don't buy anything that paints Bush in any negative light whatsoever. I talked to my boss and he gave me a heads up that I might get laid off in the near future as a result of the election. We were close (my boss and I) because we went to school together and he liked me enough to warn me of what was coming. Over the next few weeks, I talked with several people in IT, casting about for potential employment and hearing that companies were either on hiring freeze or laying people off. The two potential employers I knew well enough to talk politics with confirmed that they were laying off due to the change in leadership. I got laid off about three weeks after my warning and that company is just now CONSIDERING hiring some people back. I really don't care what you believe, it is true.
