It is this, quite simply: Rigid ideology must not stop progress on behalf of the country.
Clinton, speaking as part of WT's Distinguished Lecture Series, told a packed First United Bank Event Center that "we can do lots of stuff to grow the economy, but if we spend most of our time making ideological arguments ... we're not having the right debate. We're talking about whether to do something, instead of how to do it."
Bingo, Mr. President.
Clinton helped craft a successful presidency from 1993 until 2001 by working with congressional Republicans who took control of Congress after the landmark 1994 mid-term election. The president's tax policies, coupled with GOP-led spending restraints, helped bring about a balanced budget for several years running.
I'm not so sure if Obama would have messed up the dotcom bubble; who knows? Considering where the economy was when he took office in January of 2009, the economy HAS seen some significant improvement, albeit a bit slower than democrats would like, but it has and is improving. All major indicators, aside from foreclosures, are up.
What indicators are up? I ask in all honesty. I just heard on the radio today that 115,000 jobs were created last month. Sounds good until you hear that over 300,000 people ran out of unemployment benefits. That means around 200,000 people are no longer counted as unemployed, so they say that the unemployment rate dropped. It's sketchy math at best. I realize it's been counted like that for a long time, but this is the longest period of time with this kind of unemployment since the great depression. I also heard on the radio that something like 85% of college graduates are moving back home with their parents. The unemployment rate for young people is the highest its been since WWII. I'm just not seeing a recovery at all.
EDIT- I guess my numbers were a bit off. It seems that over 500,000 people left the labor force not the 300,00 I thought I had heard. Here is an article. People Not In Labor Force Soar By 522,000, Labor Force Participation Rate Lowest Since 1981 | ZeroHedge
I really do wish that someone else was running on the democrat side because there are soooo many people who just vote a party instead of looking at performance. These are the people who would vote for Obama no matter what he did. I fear that around election time, Obama, the media, Trumka and SEIU will create some false drama about Mitt Romney and get the mindless drones all in a frenzy about something that will never happen. If they can get enough of these people all worked up and into the voting booths then Obama probably will win. There just isn't really enough "frenzy" around Romney to get people off their butts.
Granted, the recovery is slower than democrats would like to see, but it is entirely false to say that the economy has not recovered. It clearly has. http://bea.gov/newsreleases/national...dp4q11_adv.pdf
How is current and projected government debt looking? How about the current deficit?
Yes, it's a problem, but as Dick F' Yourself Cheney said, "Reagan proved that deficits don't matter."
This will also provide some perspective on the deficit. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/24/op...ay/24sun4.html
I suspect that if you compare, as a percentage, how much Bush increased the deficit, versus what Obama increased it over Bush, you'll find, just as you do with unemployment, that, as a percentage, Bush has increased this far more than what Obama has. Unemployment isn't even comparable.
Another thing I never really thought of until my friend told me, was the fact that teenagers can't even find jobs flipping burgers. His 16yr old could not find a single summer job last year. That used to be an automatic. Also, gas prices have doubled since he took office, yet the media stays silent on that. If Bush were still there they would be screaming about his love of big oil. Obama has simply failed. You can doctor up the language and say that the recovery isn't as quick as you'd like, but the question is....Does that satisfy you enough to vote for him again? Do you want 4 more years of "not as quick as I'd like"? Or would you rather have a proven business man give it a shot? I suspect you will vote Obama even though he hasn't even satisfied you, but I wish people would reconsider and give someone else a chance. If Romney can't do it, then we need to find someone else. Status quo just because Obama has a "D" after his name is unacceptable.