Wednesday, February 27, 2008
The Daily Dose---2/27
Monday, February 25, 2008
The Daily Dose---2/25
March 4: How It Looks As Of Right Now
March 4, the date when voters in Ohio, Texas, Rhode Island, and Vermont cast their votes for the Democratic nomination contest, is shaping up to be a split decision, at least according to new polling released today. In Texas, which I predict as of right now going to Obama, a new CNN poll has Obama up by 4, while a new Rasmussen poll has Clinton with a 1% lead. Vermont, as expected, is heavily expected to go to Obama and it is the one state I can 100% say will go for him. Rhode Island, on the other hand, is a state which I can confidently say will go to Clinton. She has maintained anywhere from a 10-15% lead there, depending on which recent poll you look at. Ohio also appears to be leaning towards Clinton, but in the same way that Texas is leaning for Obama---meaning neither candidate really has a significant lead in either state and the races are still too early and close to call. But, if I had to say right now, Clinton would win Ohio and Rhode Island. Obama would win Texas and Vermont. That's just how I see it currently. Ask me about the race on Friday, and I'll probably be able to confidently predict the winners in all 4 states.
Am I Losing My Mind?
As I was eating a snack this afternoon, I tuned in to MSNBC's Tucker, where Tucker Calrson was interviewing Presidential candidate, Ralph Nader. To my shock and horror, I actually found myself agreeing with Ralph on all the issues discussed, especially energy. With that being said, I still disagree with Ralph on several of his positions that were not discussed, but it was a little shocking to find myself actually nodding in agreement with Nader. But, let me be clear, this does not mean in anyway that I would support Nader in the election. I firmly believe that a vote for Nader is a vote for a Republican. It's that simple and I hope America realizes that this time around.
Absolutely Ridiculous Memo From Obama
I'll admit, Obama is growing on me, probably due to the fact that he will be the nominee, but today his campaign released a completely idiotic memo that blamed the Clinton campaign for distributing a photo of him wearing traditional Somali dress. They accused the Clinton campaign of "fear-mongering" and said that they should be ashamed of themselves. This is such a ridiculous thing because, for one, the picture wasn't even that bad, and two, why does it have to be the Clinton campaign who sent out the memo? Obama needs to wake up and realize that he's not just facing the Clintons anymore, he's facing the right-wing slime machine. As Maggie Williams said in a press release,
"Enough. If Barack Obama's campaign wants to suggest that a photo of him wearing traditional Somali clothing is divisive, they should be ashamed. Hillary Clinton has worn the traditional clothing of countries she has visited and had those photos published widely.
This is nothing more than an obvious and transparent attempt to distract from the serious issues confronting our country today and to attempt to create the very divisions they claim to decry.
We will not be distracted."
In Defense of Hillary...
Hillary has been slammed on the blogosphere for "mocking" Obama's message of change. But, at least in my opinion, she has a point. I have yet to get an answer from an Obama supporter about what exactly Obama will do to solve all our problems. Sure, Obama is an excellent speaker and knows how to get thousands of people fired up, but what about when this campaign is over. What about when Obama sits down in the Oval Office, and the friendly crowds are gone, and it's time for Obama to be President, to be Commander-in-Chief. Can he handle it? I certainly hope so, but I honestly don't know. In fact, I can draw another potential comparison between Obama and Deval Patrick. Patrick was a great speaker and knew how to energize a crowd, but as anyone in Massachusetts can tell you, when it came to get down to business, Patrick fell a little short in his first months as governor. His inexperience prevented him from being ready "on day one". With all the challenges America faces, I just can't help but feel that we need someone to be ready, "on day one".
The U.S. Economy: Which Party Performs Best? (Part III of III, The Clinton/ Bush Administrations)
Bill Clinton 1993-2001
Bill Clinton came to office after 12 straight years of record deficit spending and a dramatic increase in the National Debt during the Reagan-Bush years. A fiscal night mare no other President faced. But Clinton had a real fiscal plan to reverse the out of control spending and an economic plan that was broad based to create the greatest economy in modern time. The Democratic controlled congress passed Clinton's fiscal and economic plans without one vote from the Republicans in congress. They predicted doom and gloom on the floor of congress; record unemployment, record deficits, a devastating economy and etc., and they were proven wrong.
The economic and fiscal package contained tax increases and tax reductions for the people and businesses, along with other tax benefits for families. It was broad based and mandated that the budget be in balance over a number of years and contained spending restraints. Over 22.7 million new jobs were created on Clinton's watch in 8 years. That was 4 million more jobs created than the Reagan-Bush administration created in the 12 years they served at the helm. 91% of the job creation under Clinton was in the private sector, the highest in 50 years. The neocon Presidents always talk about promoting the private sector but it was Clinton and his economic policy that actually accomplished the deed.
The Republican's talk about fiscal responsibility but it was Clinton who accomplished that also. The deficit fell every year during Clinton's first term and the budget was in surplus his last four years in office. His administration left the incoming President George W. Bush a projected surplus of 5.6 trilling dollars and a budget in the black. but that all changed in one short year under Bush.
George W. Bush 2001-2009
During his campaign for President Bush acknowledged the $5.6 trillion surplus the federal government was running and said it was the peoples money and he would return it to the people in the form of tax cuts. (Which everyone knows benefited the most wealthy the most.) Once again trickle down economics and voodoo economics was reintroduced to the american people.
Bush then set a course to reverse the fiscal and economic policies of the Clinton administration which has led to the largest deficit spending spree in the history of our country and the largest ever increase in the National Debt and the country still has to live through two more of Bush's Budgets, one ending fiscal 9/30/08 and 9/30/09. The CBO has already projected the 08 deficit at over $260 Billion and the 09 at over $400 billion. That's over $600billion more to add to the National Debt.
Bush has continued the reckless spending of the Reagan-Bush years in office and is designed to bankrupt the federal government so social security, medicare and other federal programs that have helped the people have to shut down. They want to see social security made into private accounts so the wealthy financial institutions can get a hold of that money so they can pull another Enron. The tax cuts of those three presidents was done to take the people's mind off what they were really up to. The public has paid for those tax cuts over and over with debt and trillions of dollars in interest paid on the debt they created. Money that could be used for other needed purposes.
And now we are in the midst of another recession, the second one on this president's watch. The lack of a fiscal and economic policy has been so reckless, the nation and its people have lost all the gains it made under Clinton's administration. The economy lost 13,000 jobs during Bush's first term in office and last month it was announced the economy lost 17,000 jobs. Bush has asked for and received from congress a stimulus package, not the first financial aid to help the economy. The problem is Bush seven years into his presidency still has no economic plan for a sustained economy.
This is the President who had a business background we are told, but he used his experience to harm the country and its people instead of setting a higher course for the benefit of all. The $5.6 trillion projected surpluses vanished under deficit spending on Bush's watch. Never was any President in modern times able to take office with such a sound fiscal government and economy than Bush and he blew it big time. The following numbers tell the whole sad story.
Budget Deficits or Surpluses
Bill Clinton's Administration
1994 $203.2 Billion Deficit
1995 164.0 Billion Deficit
1996 107.4 Billion Deficit
1997 21.9 Billion Deficit
1998 69.3 Billion Surplus
1999 125.6 Billion Surplus
2000 236.0 Billion Surplus
2001 128.0 Billion Surplus
Total for 8 years: $62.8 Billion Surplus
George Bush Administration
2002 $157.8 Billion Deficit
2003 377.6 Billion Deficit
2004 412.7 Billion Deficit
2005 318.3 Billion Deficit
2006 248.2 Billion Deficit
2007 162.8 Billion Deficit
Total Deficit Spending: $1,677 Trillion
2008 $260.0 Billion Deficit Projected
2009 $400.0 Billion Deficit Projected
Total Deficit Spending including Projected: $2,337 Trillion
National Debt
9/30/01 When Clinton Left Office: $5,807,463 Trillion
9/30/93 When Clinton Took Office: $4,411,488 Trillion
Total increase in National Debt: $1,395,981 Trillion (increase: 31.6%)
As of 2/22/08: $9,298,686 Trillion
9/30/01 When Bush Took Office $5,807,463 Trillion
Total increase in National Debt
with 2 more years of deficit spending
to add: $3,491,223 Trillion (increase of 60%)
Spending vs. Previous Administration
Clinton First Term $6,139.7 Trillion
Bush I First Term $5,368.5 Trillion
Increase of 14% $771.2 Billion
Bush II First Term $ 8,936,5 Trillion
Clinton First Term $6,139.7 Trillion
Increase of 46% $2,796.8 Trillion
Clinton 2nd Term $7,007.1 Trillion
Clinton 1st Term $6,139.7 Trillion
Increase of 14% $867.4 Billion
Public Debt
When Clinton Left Office $3,319.6 Trillion
When Clinton Took Office $3,248.4 Trillion
A increase in Public Debt of $71.2 Billion (increase of 2%)
Bush thru 2007 $5,035.3 Trillion
When Bush Took Office $3,319.6 Trillion
A Increase in Public Debt of $1,715.7 Trillion (increase of 52%)
Public Debt as Percentage of GDP
When Clinton Left Office 33%
Bush as of 2007 36% (two more budget years to go)
Job Creation
Clinton first term 11,507,000 Million
Clinton second term 11,239,000 Million
Total Jobs Created 22,746,000 Million
Bush first term 13,000 Thousands jobs lost
Bush second term thru 2007 5,807,000 Million
Unemployment
The unemployment rate when Clinton took office was 7.3%. It was 4.2% when he left office for a total decline of 3.1% during his two terms in office. The unemployment rate declined every year on his watch and for 5 months during the year 2000 it stood at 3.9%, the lowest in over 30 years.
The unemployment rate when Bush took office was 4.2%. It went up to 6.3% in 2003 and stood at 4.9% in January of 2008, a total increase in unemployment of .6% as of that date. The lowest was 4.4% in 2006. Mr. Bush inherited the lowest unemployment rate in 30 years when he took office.
It should be noted that Bush's very first budget that ended fiscal 9/30/02 was in deficit to the tune of $157.8 Billion 6 months prior to the start of the Iraq war. Mr. Bush had no plans to balance any budget. The people need to think hard about this massive reversal of fiscal responsibility. It is no wonder the conservatives hate Clinton. He accomplished just what he said he would do with out their vote and despite their opposition.
I will have a follow up to Part III in a recap and conclusions. Stay tuned.
All years information are fiscal years with the exception of unemployment.
Notes: The National Debt is made up of Private and Public Debt.
President Clinton paid down the public debt $453 Billion in his last 4 years in office. Reagan and the two Bush's paid down nothing in their 20 years at the helm.
Saturday, February 23, 2008
The Daily Dose---2/23
Democratic Veeps
There has been a lot of buzz on the net concerning who Barack Obama might choose as his Vice-President. Frankly, I don't want to rule out Sen. Clinton, but it does appear that Obama will be the nominee. So, who will he choose? Many are suggesting Gov. Kathleen Sebelius of Kansas. I like Gov. Sebelius, but she's not right to balance out the ticket. Obama needs someone with foreign policy experience first and foremost, and Sebelius does not have that right now. Many though, are adamant that Obama should choose a female running mate, to pacify the women who would be disgruntled if Sen. Clinton does not win. I'm not saying she's the right person, but Sen. Barbara Boxer is probably the only female, besides Sen. Clinton of course, who is young enough, yet has enough foreign policy credentials to be on the Presidential ticket (Sen. Feinstein would be other, but she is too old). The problem with Boxer is that California is going to go for Obama regardless of whether or not she is on the ticket. My suggestion for Obama would be someone like Bill Richardson. Richardson has executive experience, unparalleled foreign policy experience, and would do a great deal to bring Latinos on to the Obama campaign. And although I don't think Richardson is that exciting or was that great of a candidate in his own right, he might be the best choice out there for Obama. Any other thoughts?