FACT: During the 8 yr Clinton administration, SIX TIMES the number of jobs were created...

[givemebackmycountry]

than during the TWENTY years of the Reagan (all hail) and BOTH Bush administrations.
OOhhh.... but he got a BLOWJOB!!!!!!

Can we get the freaking Democrats to be chanting this FACT like the Hari Krishna's EVERY MINUTE OF EVERY DAY starting tomorrow morning?
Thank you David Cay Johnston.
He was on "Countdown" tonight making me want to jump off my 3rd floor deck onto the concrete below.
Why do I belong to a party of spineless FUCKING pantywaists?

[bluetiger]

1. No one on Earth

Will agree with you more then me

my only thought is what you see and hear in the MSM is not
real Dem's

(though if this was a stab your enemy in the throat kind of
party, the Dem's would be all over the media.....but maybe
they can't even if they tried?) 

[ChoppinBroccoli]

2. But, But, But................

................the Tech Bubble! And the Dot-Com Boom! Clinton didn't have anything to do with all those jobs! It was merely happenstance that he happened to be in office when all those jobs were created!!! Argle-Bargle!!! How DARE you say anything negative about Saint Ronald!!! He's up in Heaven right now, seated at God's right hand, lovingly feeding him KFC popcorn chicken!!! (God made Jesus sit at the folding card table in the other room after Reagan died.) Everyone knows he's the greatest leader this universe has ever produced!!! (Reagan; not God).

[seattleblue]

3. Democratic politicians don't quote your "fact" because it is not true

and they don't want to be called on it. The Bureau of Labor Statistics, which is a non-partisan agency of the Department of Labor says Clinton job creation was 22.7 million and the Reagan Bush-Bush creation was 19.8 million. That is not six times or anything close to it. Where are you getting this "fact" from? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jobs_created_during_U.S._presidential_terms and http://data.bls.gov/PDQ/servlet/SurveyOutputServlet?data_tool=latest_numbers&series_id=CES0000000001 and http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/surveymost?bls

[Liquorice]

4. Bill Clinton is a genius. nt

[wuushew]

5. Is he though?

And if so what kind of genius? I would like to pick his brain and see how good his spatial problem solving or math skills are.

Obtaining political results is not necessarily the sign of superior intelligence. Clinton is a tall man with a disarming face. The ability to influence people may not be the result of any conscious effort on his part.

[Liquorice]

6. Huh?? Bill Clinton is obviously an exceptionally smart man.

As far as his spatial skills and math skills, he was at the top of his class in advanced mathematics and thought about going into that field in high school. You obviously didn't read his autobiography (which was quite good, by the way). Regardless, math skills are not THE indicator of intelligence. Bill Clinton is intelligent on many different fronts. It's pretty fair to say he's a genius. It's interesting that you seem threatened by that.

[wuushew]

7. No, prove he is a "genius"

Its not hard to find people of similiar academic achievment in life. My dad grew up in dirt poor Arkansas and went on to advanced degrees. Why should I grant Bill Clinton any more respect than other accomplished individuals?


Why does Mr. Genius not admit that outsourcing he promoted has evicerated the middle class or that growth and globalization are incompatible with sustanible ecocology and other problems? Does he know and just not care?

What is he an expert on and how or when has he validated his theories of the world?

[Liquorice]

8. Umm, okay. You win. I have not administered an IQ test to Bill Clinton. I still believe

he's a genius, but it's not possible to prove it. And I don't know what your father has to do with anything???

[ChoppinBroccoli]

9. Um, They Don't Give The Rhodes Scholarship To Dummies

He did a damn sight more than just come from humble beginnings to earn "advanced degrees." He at one time was named the top college student in the entire nation. I don't know if that qualifies you as a genius (I think that has something to do with your IQ points and whatnot), but I know they don't hand out that award to dummies.

[wuushew]

10. Yes, but other people also have Rhodes scholarships!

Rachel Maddow for one. Since Clinton seems to be wrong about so many things what mechanism should I use to ration my praise?

[Liquorice]

11. Just because you disagree with Clinton does not mean he isn't a genius.

No president governs in a vacuum. Presidents are always constrained by public opinion, the strength of their opposition, congress, etc., etc. If a president doesn't take these many things into account s/he will be a one-term, ineffectual president who will get nothing done. Clinton got a lot done, and he did a lot of good. He made mistakes and he made concessions that he regrets, but he did the best he could with what he had. All presidents make mistakes and have regrets; that doesn't mean they're not intelligent. It just means they are human.

[depakid]

12. Tony Abbott got a Rhodes Scholarship!

and I have news- he's not the sharpest tool in the shed.