"You just aren't being honest...It really is that simple.
First, let's address the GDP growth issue. I would greatly appreciate you stop telling tales about 4% growth for 4 years. Here is what the joint economic committee released in March of 1996
*******************************
During 1995, GDP expanded at an anemic 1.4 percent growth rate (4th quarter to 4th quarter). Fourth quarter economic growth was very slow at 0.9 percent per annum. Last year's growth rate was significantly below 1994's GDP growth of 3.5 percent, and was the weakest performance since the recession ended in 1991. If the American economy is limited to 1.4 percent growth, the living standards of America's workers will continue to stagnate.
*********************************
Here are the facts; the first Q following the 2003 tax cut was the fastest growth in 20 years and that, and the 9 quarters that followed, are the fastest 10 straight quarters in 50 years.
Next, let's deal with unemployment. You said;
***********************************
Perhaps you dont understand what unemployment is.
Its not based off of circulating money and inflation - its based off of the number of people who stated they had been unemployed and actively looking for a job in the last six months.
******************************************
In a word... DUH
but companies who have surplus cash, build, expand and hire. What we had under Clinton was actualy OVER employment in the tech sector that covered over bleeding in manufacturing, construction, and small buisness jobs. I saw this phenomena first hand. When I went to work in a western New Jersey buisness campus, near the end of clinton's reign, there was a tech company that was leasing space in 4 buildings, totaling about 3 million square feet. By the time the market bottomed out in 2002, they were down to 3 floors in a single building, and 1 of them was only half full.
Stock buyers and Companies lost their minds in the 2nd half of the 1990s and went on a crazed, drunken and COMPLETLY UNSUSTAINABLE binge. It wasn't an economy at all, it was a frenetic sugar high that came crashing down as fast as it went up.
You Clinton apologists are so brazenly dishonest it defies imagination. Clinton inherited a booming economy and crashed it. Bush inherited a crashed economy and has turned it into a seemingly unstoppable juggernaut that brushed off Katrina like an annoying insect.
As far as your "20 million jobs", that is also a high degree of book cooking. It is well known that the Clinton administration added a "bias" to the payroll job numbers, of about 140,000 jobs per month. So that means they overstated the number of jobs created from January 1994 to January 2001 by...what?....11.8 million jobs?
In fact, the Clinton administration's complicity in economic book cooking is well established...
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/730355/postsThe other amusing thing is the way that you stop the economic counting at January 2001.
The massive job losses that occured? 70% were in 2001. Those were CLINTON job losses, not Bush job losses. Bush's economic policy wasn't even PASSED until Q3 2001 and, even then, it had to weather the blow of 911.
You are not a "watch dog", you are just a Clinton apologist who wants to spin. However, when you look at the Clinton record vs the Bush record HONESTLY, there is no comparison... Bush beats him hands down.
Posted 1/10/2006 at 8:58 AM by anewtone"