Adults away, Kentuck kicks over lantern!

[zeitgeist]

http://upload.democraticunderground.com/10022072674

kentuck (64,561 posts)

The Big Dog's Big Lie
It was Bill Clinton that pushed through the NAFTA and GATT trade treaties that started the hemorrhaging of jobs from this country. Let's be honest with ourselves. It was Bill Clinton that said these trade treaties would be good for the working people of this country. Union leaders did not support his claim, although they were timid in opposing their passage.

Since NAFTA, we have seen the manufacturing base in this country shrivel up and wages sink to record lows with unemployment at levels unseen in a very long time. We no longer have enough jobs for our people.

Yes, we had record unemployment and a booming economy under Clinton, but much of it was the timing of history and a technological revolution with a computer in every garage. It sparked the economy for a while. Until Apple and other big tech firms decided to move those jobs overseas, mostly because of lower wages and higher profits. We are now paying the price for those decisions made in the 1990's.  

It is obvious from the responses to this thread that DU has been left to fly by wire over the holidays.

 BlueCaliDem (4,333 posts)
97. If you don't count Blacks, who were initially excluded from Social Security

through their professions, or Asian-Americans, who were rounded up and tossed into Interncamps, yes, FDR was for 98% - of the Caucasian people.

I'm Asian-American, and had my family lived in the U.S. in that time, they would have undoubtedly been rounded up and tossed into interncamps. Did you ever ask yourself why Blacks registered as Republicans the moment they could instead of registering as Democrats until JFK?

FDR was a Democrat, but based on his racially divisive policies, he is NO hero to me.  

AnotherMcIntosh (5,115 posts)
132. "Did you ever ask yourself why Blacks registered as Republicans ..." It might have something to

that Lincoln and a great many others who helped free the slaves were Republicans.

I doubt that you can point to any Republican policy in the Harding Administration that encouraged Blacks to register as Republicans. The same is true with respect to the Coolidge and Hoover Administrations. If Harding, Coolidge, and Hoover had wonderful policies that benefited Black Americans, what were they?

If Harding, Coolidge, and Hoover ever promoted Social Security for anyone, when did this happen?

And do you somehow think, given the events in the 1940's, that Harding, Coolidge, and Hoover would not have had internment camps? You justify your criticism of FDR by indicating that he was opposed to Asians (including, apparently, Chinese descendants) by saying:

"I'm Asian-American, and had my family lived in the U.S. in that time, they would have undoubtedly been rounded up and tossed into interncamps."

Did the Japanese not have internment camps for Occidentals? Since you didn't identify yourself as a Japanese descendant, does that mean that you are an Asian descendant other than a Japanese descendant? Do you have anything to justify your belief that FDR placed all Asians in internment camps? And that he was the only person at the time who did so or would have done so?

I figured I better grab these before they went away.

They spank the Big Dog pretty good in this thread too.

sulphurdunn (2,988 posts)
36. Bring on the trolls

if their arguments are predicated upon fact. I've been a Democrat all my life. I had serious reservations about voting for Clinton, but it came down, as it always does anymore, to voting for a Blue Dog Democrat or a rabid dog Republican. NAFTA and the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act can fairly be laid at the feet of Clinton, aided and abetted by both parties and their Wall Street overlords. That's just a fact and should remind us of the reality of our corporate political duopoly.

[Carl]

I guess AnotherMcIntosh is admitting that blacks voted for freedom until dems bribed them back into another form of enslavement.

At least it admits it.

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

Since NAFTA, we have seen the manufacturing base in this country shrivel up and wages sink to record lows with unemployment at levels unseen in a very long time. We no longer have enough jobs for our people.

Bush had a 4.5% UE rate after NAFTA

What changed?

[GOBUCKS]

Bush had a 4.5% UE rate after NAFTA

What changed?

During the Great Bush Prosperity our county here in red state hell had unemployment just a hair above 2.0%, which is just about the percentage of 0bamaites here.

[zeitgeist]

Since Kentuck initially kicked the lantern over this blaze has grown to a surprising 250 posts.  I just revisited it and grabbed the latest which includes a jury decision. Apparently the DUmmie Mods are sobering up?

Buzz Clik (25,086 posts)

221. It was about this time in 2008 that I was becoming disgusted at DU for threads like this.

After 8 years of Bush, Obama was getting trashed before he even took office. Six months later, a huge vocal crowd was nearly calling for Obama's impeachment. I quit posting here for 2.5 years. Here we go again. The trouble with the hard left is they do not know how to lead. They make a great opposition party, but simply have no leadership skills. Maybe no people skills -- I don't know. They want us to draw a line in the sand and never compromise, as if leadership means controlling the agenda from start to finish.

Hats off and a big thumbs up to those who have scorned this thread. Not so much for those who have rallied to its defense.  

Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #221)
Thu Dec 27, 2012, 03:51 AM
 Hekate (19,429 posts)
243. Agreed, Buzz Clik

Last edited Thu Dec 27, 2012, 03:58 AM USA/ET - Edit history (1)

I honestly do not understand why a site calling itself Democratic would allow threads about, for instance, impeachment of a Democratic president -- not this one, not tonight, at least not yet.

And this one -- for gods' sake, was the OP bored and looking for an evening's entertainment? Why this topic? Why now? Why the slam on Clinton?

Here we go again, indeed.

Where is that drama queen photo??

Meh drama, attention same difference.

Response to Hekate (Reply #243)
Thu Dec 27, 2012, 06:04 AM
 Union Scribe (3,813 posts)
251. Why now.

1. We're still dealing with the consequences of NAFTA.
2. The same problems come up with every new FTA.
3. An H-Bomb of an FTA is being negotiated in secret by lobbyists.
4. Obama needs to hear that that is not acceptable.
5. Those who don't learn from history are doomed, period.
Reply to this post
Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

FTA? Anyone,  Bueller??

Response to kentuck (Original post)

<Post hidden by jury decision>

Is that pizza I smell cooking??

[Crazy Horse]

Meh drama, attention same difference. FTA? Anyone,  Bueller??

Free Trade Agreement......I believe

[jukin]

1. The USA is still manufacturing more goods year over year (except 09)  even with an economic incompetent at the helm of our country the last four years.

2. The unions and OSHA made it very attractive to spend billions to automate manufacturing jobs. Those items that were not cost effective were shipped to lower cost business climates in taxes, regulations, and labor costs.

3. The unions, OSHA, EPA, and a myriad of other totalitarian regulating alphabet soup agencies forced many industries to move to friendlier climates or go out of business. These businesses were not looking to make money just stay alive.

4. The unions, OSHA, EPA, and a myriad of other totalitarian regulating alphabet soup agencies forces many industries to NEVER consider putting huge capital outlays in the USA. Look to kalifornia for that. Intel will never spend another cent here but will in Texas, Arizona, and even Oregon. Regulation costs stated by the kalifornia government itself adds 35% of COGS.

Lower labor rates and taxes are a small part of why industries leave the USA and blue states. It. Is. The. Regulations.