Bush ends Reganism...

Dixie said:
Nope, I sure can't respond to this. First, it's not the topic of this thread, and I try to remain on topic whenever possible. Secondly, I refuse to debate with the uneducated. Learn how to spell correctly and show me you have the intellect to discuss the issues, and I will be more than happy to debate with you.
Click to expand...

COP OUT! YOU ARE A WIMP.
 
You see, I know this is a bit complicated for someone like you, but when the Congress approperates money for "Public Schools" it is passing a law that if those public schools promoted a religien would be violative of the First Amendment. When "congress" passes a law to create a department of Education, if that Department of Education were to promote a religen, that law would be violative of the 1st Amendment.

To be fair they dont teach this in Alabama, but it is true. You see, Congress is not only prohibited from passing a law that says, "Islam is the national religen and all Americans are required to practice it." Congress is also prohibited from passing laws, no matter what they call the law, that in effect do promote a religen. Like funding for a school that promotes the establishment of a national religen.
 
Onceler said:
"show me you have the intellect to discuss the issues"

LOL

Now THAT is truly funny. Dixie, the keen judge of intellect...
Click to expand...

Yeah, I guess that is a little hypocritical of me, after all, I discuss the issues with you, and you don't have the intellect to discuss them. I think it's because you do at least make an attempt at correct spelling most of the time. So I will amend my remarks to say... Show me you have at least a high school level of literacy skills. Sorry for that mistake, I stand corrected.
 
I think of this appositionally, Reagan began the slide to Bush and the destruction of conservative politics and the republican party. Voodoo economics, supply side, trickle down, call it what you like it failed. When you are supposed to manage the very institution, you think is the problem, how can you govern. And the militaristic image Reagan preached lead to a hubris that caused a fool to go where he didn't belong. Sad party, but I'm glad to see Palin will lead them out of the wilderness. LMAO
 
cawacko said:
You say there was rampant deregulation. Can you name one large or good sized deregulation passed while Bush was President? Can you name anything near the size of the regulatory Sarbenes-Oxley that was passed?
Click to expand...

How about the Commodities Futures Modernization Act which is, by and large, responsible for our current financial disaster that also included deregulating energy trading markets that lead to the Enron collapse of which Sarbannes Oxley was a poltical back lash to.).

When you consider that the Commodities Futures Modernization Act allowed unregulated financial instruments such as derivatives for which no product can be identified and bundled supprime mortgage instrument that sing to the tune of 60 Trillions dollars, yea that's right...I didn't stuter, that's $60 TRILLION Dollars, more than four times the USA's GDP.

Now when you consider that over the last two years as the subprime mortgage problem became worse, the Bush administration and congressional Republicans have a long and well documented record of opposing the enforcement of regulations as well as the use by President Bush of his veto.

And now in his last 90 days, as is commonly known, Bush is pushing deregulation through the federal registrar, which will have the affect of law, mainly in the areas of environmental and consumer protections. Particularly consumer credit protections.

Then we could also discuss his attempts at envirionmental deregulation such as the Clean Skies Initiatives and eliminating the New Source Review.

Are those good enough examples for you?
 
Dixie is such an elitest, you have to spell everythign perfectly for him to discuss anything with you. Poor Thomas Jefferson, he would have not been intelegent enough to speak with Dixie...!
 
Dixie said:
Wrong on all counts. As was pointed out, neither Bush president incorporated Reagan principles in their economic plan. The Bush economic plan is not the logical extension of anything having to do with Ronald Reagan. Ironically, Bush and Obama are not that different in their fiscal ideologies! For example, both men agree on the massive government bailouts currently happening.

The only way Reagan and Bush are even similar, is on cutting marginal tax rates to generate revenue, and even Clinton realized this. Obama is already backing off his pledge to raise taxes, because he understands the dynamics as well. We've not had a president who vigorously endorsed Reagan economic principles, since Ronald Reagan!
Click to expand...

S&L crisis?

OHNOEZ?! BUT THATS WAHS IDFERRENTS!?

Cutting marginal tax rates makes revenue plummet - as demonstrated by the catastrohpic failure of the preceding four far, far right presidencies that were exactly alike in policy.
 
We have yet to pay for the S&L bailout. The 30 yr treasury bonds that financed it are coming due pretty soon though.
 
Mottleydude said:
How about the Commodities Futures Modernization Act which is, by and large, responsible for our current financial disaster that also included deregulating energy trading markets that lead to the Enron collapse of which Sarbannes Oxley was a poltical back lash to.).

When you consider that the Commodities Futures Modernization Act allowed unregulated financial instruments such as derivatives for which no product can be identified and bundled supprime mortgage instrument that sing to the tune of 60 Trillions dollars, yea that's right...I didn't stuter, that's $60 TRILLION Dollars, more than four times the USA's GDP.

Now when you consider that over the last two years as the subprime mortgage problem became worse, the Bush administration and congressional Republicans have a long and well documented record of opposing the enforcement of regulations as well as the use by President Bush of his veto.

And now in his last 90 days, as is commonly known, Bush is pushing deregulation through the federal registrar, which will have the affect of law, mainly in the areas of environmental and consumer protections. Particularly consumer credit protections.

Then we could also discuss his attempts at envirionmental deregulation such as the Clean Skies Initiatives and eliminating the New Source Review.

Are those good enough examples for you?
Click to expand...

The Commodities Futures Modernization Act was signed in 2000 by President Clinton. So that was not an act of the Bush administration.

The Democrats have controlled Congress for the past two years so they have had the ability if they desired to regulate more.

Yes Bush is trying to pass things today at the last moment but when Obama was on the trail talking about this failure of Bush and deregulation he was talking about the prior 6 to 7 years.

I'm not even asking as a rhetorical question because I don't know the answer. The repeated talking point seems to be Bush and deregulation. But liked I said the largest thing I find is regulation in Sarbenes-Oxley. Yes there was pressure from the public 'to do something' but that doesn't mean it was right for him to do or that it hasn't hurt business.

The best I get is what you referenced which is the oversight of some markets was not as strong as it could or should have been. That's a legitimate argument. But is that deregulation?

Hell, in a way I'm getting more impressed with Clinton all the time because he actually did do some deregulating.
 
The Democrats have controlled Congress for the past two years so they have had the ability if they desired to regulate more.
//

Those darn obstructionist Republicans in congress.
 
I don't blame deregulation but the Libtards that do should look at who actually deregulated. It was their party.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top