Are the wheels coming off the GW wagon?

[Syzygyone]

Originally posted by rpm371
Syzy, you still haven't said what facts, if any, were incorrect. I'm putting forward a legit question. It's not that inconceivable that Bush could lose his party's nomination to a strong Republican (i.e.McCain) if the economy continues to crumble. There is only so much that can be blamed on 9/11.

Well the mere fact that you typed it shows that it is not inconceivable doesn't it.

Your original post insinuates that the deficit is a record.  That's not the truth, is it. It's SPIN, isn't it.  The deficit isn't even close to a record in terms of GNP percentage.

Your original post states that the economy is stumbling.  By many measures, it isn't.  So, your question about Bush' vulnerability due to the economy begs the question of the true condition of the economy.  and no, I'm not going to play the statistics game.

You state that there a accusations of falsified CIA intel.  I don't think that's a fact either.  There was a forged doc that was found out and not used as a basis IIRC, and the yellowcake issue is far from proven to be false, according to the news reports I've seen lately.  Just ask the French DGSE, eh?

As far as how much can be blamed on 9/11, I think it's a lot more than your insinuation insinuates.  I don't think we can know the full ripple effects until much more time has passed and history sorts things out.

I've got no problem with your legitimate questions about wether or not Bush is vulnerable.  Of course he is.  But what is the worth of asking a legitimate question with so much illigitmate spin garbage as its premise.

And if your gonna troll, I have to admit that trolling with Imus bait does provide the requisite stink.  After all, you hooked me din't ya.  But, in the future, try to use more reliable sources like CNN or even better the BBC or ever more better, the NY or LA times. Oh never mind, those are what Imus uses.

Meanwhile, please keep us informed of how the McCain for president campaign is going.  We all need a good laugh cause, the economy sucks ya know!

[rpm]

Here's CNN's story.

Even so, a shortfall 4 percent as large as the economy begins to approach the dimension of the deficits of the 1980s and early 1990s that both parties agreed then were untenable.

I belive McCain has already announced he will not run, I was just using him as an example.

[Eagler]

[Syzygyone]

Originally posted by rpm371
Here's CNN's story.


I belive McCain has already announced he will not run, I was just using him as an example.

Sorry if I seemed to be flamin ya' earlier RPM.   It was late and I had a bad night.  Couldn't sleep.  So, what do I do?  Check out the AH BBS.  Dumb!

But, about your latest post, from your quote, though, I think the operative words to heed are "begins to approach".  That's far from being a "record".

[OneWordAnswer]

Originally posted by rpm
A Record Breaking deficit of $455 and $475 Billion (with a capitol B) for the next 2 years has been announced. What effect is this going to have on the already stumbling economy? Is a full blown Recession ready to happen? Accusations of falcified CIA intel and the can of worms that will open. Are the wheels starting to come off the deadlock cinch 2nd Term?

No.

[NUKE]

Originally posted by rpm
A Record Breaking deficit of $455 and $475 Billion (with a capitol B) for the next 2 years has been announced.

Not record breaking based on GDP.

Also, we are at war.

Oh well, back to AH.

[Lizking]

It went to **** in 1998.  The tech boom blew to hell in 2000, but it was already way gone by 1999.  The economy is pretty strong right now, and I don't really care about deficts, nor do the Democrats, any more than they care about the "major ills plaguing SSI"  (Democratic words, circa 2002).

[Saurdaukar]

LOL!  RPM has a sTawlkAr!!!11

[Krusher]

it's 2003 all over again !

[Steve]

What effect is this going to have on the already stumbling economy?

Hey dip****, maybe your economy is faltering but our is chugging along quite nicely, with healthy growth.

[DREDIOCK]

Originally posted by rpm
Syzy, what premise facts are incorrect? I was echoing a conversation from this morning's Imus program. I didn't just pull this out of thin air.

Imus??
Your using Imus as your credible source??

[DREDIOCK]

Originally posted by 10Bears
Odd, Funked up, the stock market pecked in Dec 2000..

Naw, if you take away Bush loosing the 300 billion surplus adding a half a Trillion more to the deficit.. tinkering with the Bill of Rights to cause major damage to the 1st and 4th amendments,... Lying through his teeth to the American people, Congress, the U.N security council about the reasons for war of aggression why.... you’d have a mighty fine President.

the Markets were on their downward spiral well before Dec 2000.

I remember in August before the election hearing a guy on the radio blaming the markets downward trend on Greenspan.
The surplus. if I remember correctly was a "projected" surplus.

The idea He "lied" is a bunch of BS. If he lied so did many Democrats including Clinton, Gore. And many in Congress also.

Tell us. PLEASE explain to us how he lied to Congress when in 1998 Dem members of Congress including its leadership said this

 "[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998.

And this

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998.

And how about Clintons Secratarty of State saying this?

"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998.

and this

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destrution and palaces for his cronies."
Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999.

All these statements were made prior to Bush even being elected
So please I implore you. Explain to us how "Bush lied" and they didnt.

[DREDIOCK]

Wait a second.
I just noticed.
I'm flipping responding to post in threads damn near two years old!

STOP DIGGING UP OLD CHIT!:lol

[rpm]

Originally posted by Saurdaukar
LOL!  RPM has a sTawlkAr!!!11

I must have touched a nerve.

[JBA]

Originally posted by rpm
A Record Breaking deficit of $455 and $475 Billion (with a capitol B) for the next 2 years has been announced. What effect is this going to have on the already stumbling economy? Is a full blown Recession ready to happen? Accusations of falcified CIA intel and the can of worms that will open. Are the wheels starting to come off the deadlock cinch 2nd Term?

First things first, nothing you have said is factual. Start there and maybe we can have a discussion.

If I have post once then I have post 10 times, this is not a RECORD deficit. not even close.

The economy is not "stumbling", new revised job numbers are out and Bush replaced every job we lost due to Clintons tech bubble burst, 9/11 attack and two wars.

Bush has no control over Clinton's CIA. He never replaced any of the managers that he took on from the previous admin.