What do u call people who think its somehow Clintons fault we have fewer jobs, shaky economy and huge deficit?

Question

Even after 7 years after he's gone?

Answer 1

Delusional Neocons

Answer 2

Honestly I have to agree with the cons on this one.
I even liked Clinton somewhat but he did sell this nation out with the NAFTA agreement. It has took these years to show the damage it did but here we have it. Heck Hillary even wants to reverse some of the damage and admits it didn't work like they wanted it to. Thats one we can't blame exactly on Clinton either because all the parties were in agreement and they still are because they want to unionize America with Mexico and China.
Thats why the Clintons and the Bushs are such big buddies and if Hillary gets the office we can expect the NAU to begin taking shape around 2010 is the goal.

Answer 3

Since most true Clinton supporters are still on welfare their view likely remains the same as it was in the 90's. Fewer jobs to them just means fresh faces in their trailer parks for their recreational breeding and beer swilling afternoons.

Answer 4

Fewer jobs? Shaky economy?....do you watch the news? Ever? Jimmy Carter is no longer President.

Answer 5

Idiots!

How does one explain away 3 1/2 TRILLION dollars in additional debt, which is almost the entire deficit this country had when Bush took over! It has now doubled thanks to his"fiscal restraint" that he ran on!

In 1993 President Clinton inherited the deficit spending problem and did more than just talk about it; he fixed it. In his first two years and with a cooperative Democratic Congress he set the course for the best economy this country has ever experienced. Then he worked with what could be characterized as the most hostile Congress in history, led by Republicans for the last six years of his administration. Yet, under constant personal attacks from the right, he still managed to get the growth of the debt down to 0.32% (one third of one percent) his last year in office. Had his policies been followed for one more year the debt would have been reduced for the first time since the Kennedy administration.

When President Bush II came into office in 2001 he quickly turned all that progress around. With the help of a Republican controlled Congress he immediately gave a massive tax cut based on a failed economic policy; perhaps an economic fantasy describes it better. The last year Mr. Clinton was in office the nation borrowed 18 billion dollars. The first year Mr. Bush II was in office he had to borrow 133 billion[8]. The first tax cut Bush pushed through a willing Republican Congress caused an upswing in government borrowing that was supposed to stimulate the economy, but two years later Bush had to push through yet another tax cut. The second tax cut was needed because it was clear that the first one did not work. Economic history tells us the second did not work either. As a result of all his tax cutting with no cutting in spending, in 2003 President Bush set a record for the biggest single yearly dollar increase in debt in the nation’s history. He did it again in 2004, increasing the debt more than half a trillion dollars. Since 2003 total borrowing has exceeded $500,000,000,000 per year. Even Mr. Reagan never increased the debt that much in a single year; Mr. Reagan’s biggest increase was only 282 billion, half of GWB’s outrageous spending. As a result of the fact that the debt was already pretty high when Bush II entered office, his annual rate of increase is only averaging 7% per year so far. In 2006 he was holding press conferences bragging that the debt was increasing at the rate of only 300 billion dollars a year, yet in reality it was twice that. Again the facts do not match Neo-Con rhetoric.

Of course 7% growth is a misleading figure as it does not make clear that by so drastically increasing the total debt, the amount of the annual US budget dedicated to service the debt has grown to over 20%. Thanks to misguided Neo-Con ideological thinking, over a fifth of our budget does nothing to contribute to the growth or health of the nation.

It does not matter if you call it a war or an occupation, supporting Iraq is expensive. It just boggles the imagination of any fiscally responsible person that the Republican Congress and President have repeatedly cut taxes during this overly aggressive and very expensive era for our military. The nation is borrowing money so that the we can spend more on our military than all the other nations on Earth combined, and still the Neo-Cons are calling for even more tax cuts and even more military spending.

Mr. Bush is constantly claiming that the economy is great! What he leaves out is that he is buying that simulated good economy with his borrowed dollars; it is a false economy that could very well crash the minute the borrowing stops, yet for the sake of our future it must stop.

http://www.cedarcomm.com/~stevelm1/usdebt.htm

Answer 6

Mentally Ill

CDS=Clinton Derangement Syndrome

Answer 7

We have More jobs than under Clinton, a very strong economy and almost no deficit.
Why do you lie?

Answer 8

Fewer jobs? Shaky economy?

What country do you live in?

The economy is kicking butt: incomes are rising, CPI is 2.5%, we have 4.5% unemployment......

Answer 9

Uninformed, ignorant or just plain brain dead. Not necessarily in that order.

Answer 10

People who live in La La Land

Clinton has been gone and I do not know anyone who blames him. 9-11 destroyed the economy. We are back on track.