Printable View
Some facts for the clinton supports..*cough* *cough* Bballad
Starting in 1994, Russian and Chinese military units began to purchase
U.S. made super-computers for nuclear weapons research. It may shock America
to find out that Bill Clinton allowed super-computers to be sold to Russia and
China weapons research facilities, however, the exports to Russian and Chinese
military labs came as no surprise to Clinton insiders.
Stick that one in your pipes and smoke it you commie's.
Good, america needs some balancing (i trust putin more than bush), ohh wait i forget some times that the us is good and everyone who doesn't bow down and worship is bad . (you might want to post your source , or was it from the junky hippocrite rush limbaugh?)
Thats not how we view things lumpyporridge.
and Rush limbaugh is no junky hypocritte. He's probably one of the most brilliant political thinkers in my opinion.
CNN Executive EditorQuote:
[i] (you might want to post your source , or was it from the junky hippocrite rush limbaugh?) [/B]
29 July, 1999
In 1995, Tony Podesta -- a powerful D.C. based lobbyist and brother of White
House adviser John Podesta -- had a consortium of top U.S. computer CEOs
attend secret meetings inside the White House. The meetings were on computer
hardware and software exports to China and Russia. The meetings occurred just
before Clinton changed super-computer policy. Within weeks, the Russian and
Chinese were buying computer power that now surpasses the U.S. Defense
Department.
According to documents from the Commerce Department, in 1995 the Computer
Systems Policy Project (CSPP) was represented by Tony Podesta. The CSPP is a
group of computer companies, that in 1995 included Apple, AT, Compaq, Cray,
Data General, Digital Equipment, Hewlett-Packard, IBM, Silicon Graphics,
Stratus Computer, Sun Microsystems, Tandem, and Unisys.
Officials working for Apple and Silicon Graphics are documented by the Federal
Election Commission (FEC) to be very large Clinton donors.
Great point about Greenspan. And I agree that he could have / should have done more sooner to help the economy, simply as a part of doing his job. However I disagree that his slowing the economy caused the recession to be larger. To summise from your statements, if the Enrons of the world were allowed to continue to grow in a booming economy, wouldn't that have made the bubble bigger, thus causing a larger fallout from unsuspecting individuals and companies falling prey to the massive pyramid schemes. Just a thought.Quote:
Originally posted here by bballad
I think that if you want to see who is effecting the econamy look no further then greenspan, I think his attempts at slowing the econamy in the late 90's was his only mistake. If he had worked earlyr or more agressively we may not have had as bad of a bust.
As for 9/11 and enron, well 9/11 probably helped the econamy in the long run (more military and construction contracts.) and quite poassably sped up the recovery (wars often do this, although we will pay for it later when the full weight of the deficite hits us). Enron was a symptom of the bad econamy not a cause. Look through the historu at ****edcompany.com you will see the bust starting well before any of the rest of this crap happened.
Back to the origional point how did linton rid regans coat tails to the election, if the econamy had been good in the early 90's bush senior (the man how rode regans coat tales) would have been elected. It wasn't, so in came clinton. We could see he start of a recovery in te mid 90's so he got another 4 years (well that and the fact that bob doll came across as a compleate tool.). Unless you are claming that regan was so inept that the populace was sick of the republicans I find it hard to see any convinceing argument that regan was responsable for clintons election
to stop the boom, yes, better corperate regulation and further oversite in the markets, curoption in the investmant banks that underwrote the IPO's for webvan and pets.com (as well as the rest of the dot coms) led to the boom and enevitable bust, the tech boom was a pyramid scheam (although I am not blameless I took part in the VA Linux IPO, was smart enough to read the writeing on the walls and got out quick), a giant pump and dump of worthless companies with useless busniess plans. No amount of goverment can stop human greed, but proper regulation and oversight can keep it form geting ou of hand.
I do not think that Regan was responsible for Clinton's election. I think that Congress during Bush SR's presidency, stymied any worthwhile economic packages that were proposed, leaving Bush Sr. in a political vaccum. Clinton was elected as a direct result of Congress's inaction and inability to work with Bush Sr. Too often people become fed up with the bipartizan politics and will vote for the individuals that they feel can work together for a common good. Personally I cast my vote based on values and issues alone.
As grave as these situations were, I agree that "in the long run" 9/11 and Enron will be good for the economy. If for no other reason than better accountbility amoung corporations to state their financial transactions clearly.
Yes! Yes! Yes! More money needs to be in the hands of the middle class families. I'll make a right-winger out of you yet BBallad :) The question is how to accomplish this. I look at it this way: I am better off receiving a 3-10% pay raise every year from my employer, as opposed to a 2-5% tax cut from the government every 12 years, and I will not get those pay raises unless my employer has the money to disperse accordingly. Even though the wealthy have enormous amounts of money, I feel guilty placing further tax burdens on them. After all the wealthy in this great country pay somewhere around 90% of all collected taxes. (A Limbaugh stat I think)Quote:
As for reganomics, if you want to stimulate the econamy its best to put mony in the hands of those who spend the most, thats the middel class not the 1% of the nation that is helped by reganomics
OverdueSpy: I doubtI would ever be an any winger too many nuts on both sides, as for greenspan I think he did the right thing by slowing down the econamy, I just feel that he should have started sooner and he should have been more agressive in his attempts, he let the buble grow to big. We agree on regan ot being responsable for clinton, that was glaciers insanity. the only part I dissagree with you on is money to the middel class, corpreate managers are mostly short sighted, greedy and stupid, they will do anthing they can to get short term profits at teh expense of their compnay, comunity and country. No way do they pass on the mony they get to the rest of us. Watch as companies get taxbreaks, they don't give workers raises they lay them off.
Wow two countries taht allready have nuclear capabilities, so we let them get computers so they will no longer have to live testbombs taht seems like a good thing to me. More over the goverment definition on what is a supercomputer is outdated at the time an apple desktop was a supercomputer as well as a N64 curently the ps2 and the gamecube are rated as supercomputer.Quote:
Originally posted here by /|Glacier|\
Some facts for the clinton supports..*cough* *cough* Bballad
Starting in 1994, Russian and Chinese military units began to purchase
U.S. made super-computers for nuclear weapons research. It may shock America
to find out that Bill Clinton allowed super-computers to be sold to Russia and
China weapons research facilities, however, the exports to Russian and Chinese
military labs came as no surprise to Clinton insiders.
Stick that one in your pipes and smoke it you commie's.
Bballad did you get hit in the head as a kid or somthing? Or maybe you were placed near the microwave to many times.Now back to your ravaged reply. Eventually they will sell there super computers to other communist nations there are technologically behind in the times say 50 or so years in a Bballad world every country deserves nuclear missiles. Your the perfect leftwinger Bballad because your that nutjob you speak of. Which proves my point in a Bballad world its a nuclear winter.Quote:
Wow two countries taht allready have nuclear capabilities, so we let them get computers so they will no longer have to live testbombs taht seems like a good thing to me. More over the goverment definition on what is a supercomputer is outdated at the time an apple desktop was a supercomputer as well as a N64 curently the ps2 and the gamecube are rated as supercomputer.
Did he mention a source? I just wonder if someone (democrat or republican) would really give a good statistic on something like that when THEY themselves are in that tax bracket. I poked around on te IRS website, but havent found anything yet.Quote:
After all the wealthy in this great country pay somewhere around 90% of all collected taxes. (A Limbaugh stat I think)
Hmmmm... so now we are complaining about companies having good old capitalist natures? ;) Also by the early 90's were we not trying to become friends with the Russians and end the Cold War. So what if they could process their pron a little faster on a supercomputer, the Cold War was over!Quote:
Eventually they will sell there super computers to other communist nations there are technologically behind in the times say 50 or so years in a Bballad world every country deserves nuclear missiles.
humm do you live in some sort of fantisy world where russia and the chinese don't allready have enough nucs to vaporise the US. Its not liek these are imerganing powers thay are allready part of the club. All clinton did was losen archeic and pointless restrictions taht where hampering some of our tech companies, acording to the old restrictions modern laptops are supercomputers. It seems to me that easing regulations, shrinking goveremnt oversight and allowing freetrad in an open market should be right wing ideals...oh well.Quote:
Originally posted here by /|Glacier|\
Bballad did you get hit in the head as a kid or somthing? Or maybe you were placed near the microwave to many times.Now back to your ravaged reply. Eventually they will sell there super computers to other communist nations there are technologically behind in the times say 50 or so years in a Bballad world every country deserves nuclear missiles. Your the perfect leftwinger Bballad because your that nutjob you speak of. Which proves my point in a Bballad world its a nuclear winter.
he is in rehab right now i believe or just got out for longterm addiction to opiates and what are his stated views on drug addiction?. I would consider him a shallow blabbermouth myself , a great thinker on the right(not in the right;) ) would be ayn rand or Thomas hobbes.Quote:
Originally posted here by cheyenne1212
Thats not how we view things lumpyporridge.
and Rush limbaugh is no junky hypocritte. He's probably one of the most brilliant political thinkers in my opinion.