Looks to me like there were 119 million people working in December 1992 and 137.6 million working in December 2000 and shouldn't that be the number used to show employment? 17.4 million more people working at the end of the Clinton term vs. when he started. Compare that to Obama where there are 4 million less working today than when he started. Hardly stellar performance but doesn't escape the liberal spin. Notice Bush job creation from December 2000 until the recession started in December 2007. Interesting how those numbers escape you.
Now you can keep playing those liberal games of diversion from the disaster that is in the WH now but it won't do any good. People vote their pocket books and this upcoming an election will be a referendum on the leftwing Obama agenda, not GW Bush
HELPED is the key word, considering that “HISTORY” tells us that for first six years of the bush administration, both houses and the Presidency were in republican hands.QUOTE Conservative
The country turned this govt. over to those that helped create it and did nothing to prevent it, the Democrats.
Unlike the party of NO, the dems occasionally crossed party lines when it came to “perceived” national security.
I have pointed this out to you in other threads (plural is no typo), so there is no need to rehash this fallacy yet again. All anyone has to do is use their friend goggle+ “Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act”.The "Gipper" understood free enterprise and capitalism and implemented a pro growth economic agenda cutting taxes 25% over three years.
Your hero, in 1982 signed The “Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act”, he called it that so he could pretend that it wasn’t a tax increase but at that time it was the largest peacetime tax increase in American history. According to a Treasury Department study TEFRA was a 1% of GDP tax increase. Kinda like he did when he was Governor of Calyfornia, which I also pointed out to you in a previous thread.Again goggle is your friend.
The "Gipper" was a grade B actor, that should have won an Academy Award for his portrayal of a President for eight years.The "Gipper" believed in the American people and entreprenuerial spirit. The "Gipper" turned the American spirit loose. Obama believes in the Govt. and wealth redistribution. Obama is no "Gipper.
The haggardness of poverty is everywhere seen contrasted with the sleekness of wealth, the exhorted labor of some compensating for the idleness of others, wretched hovels by the side of stately colonnades, the rags of indigence blended with the ensigns of opulence; in a word, the most useless profusion in the midst of the most urgent wants.Jean-Baptiste Say