Just print more money. Duh.

;)

The mistake the Hoover Administration made in 1930 was to cut spending....the way out of a Depression is for the spending to remain the same while giving some tax relief to the people so they will spend...Third Interest rates must be lowered to help keep the economy liquid...

That was another proof of how serious this Recession was, that I forgot to mention why a fiscal conservative would spend like a drunk sailor on shore leave...the Interest rate havn't been this low in 40 some odd years...

So the Bush Administration did the RIGHT thing with it's fiscal policy...also being faced with a war doesn't help matters...

So, is the Iraq war saving our economy?

Question is....Would there be an economy left if the USA was not engaged in fighting Terrorist activities around the globe...or would the world have fallen into chaos...a veritble collaspe of civilization.

Sadam in HINDSIGHT posed no immediate threat..other than being able to thumb his nose at the US, bide his time for the end of sanctions to reconstitiute his weapons programs and support at LEAST Hamas with money for the suicide bombers families...

Sadam at the time looked like a more immediate threat...and in spite of all the bickering back and forth is better off gone than left in power...However it isn't the war that the Liberals are cryingf about it's the aftermanth...the continual bleeding out of the USA in lives and treasure...

I had argued that America wants instant gratification..that everything must be resolved in a one hour format...well life ain't like that and sometimes things gotta get alot worse before they get better...Is Irawreck a lost cause...???? I can tell U the USA is NOW in a position where it can't walk away and let the country fall into chaos...

Do you realize you have completely contradicted the stance of your Republican president on the eve of his invasion in Iraq - "greeted with flowers as liberators," "mission accomplished."

And kudos, Tabs; sounds as if you're finally admitting Iraq is a friggin' quagmire.

And since you won't answer my initial question (or can't), I'll do it for you. Iraq, as far as I can see, is not helping the economy. Not like in WW2, Korea, and Vietnam. We still have a few million people out of work, right? So much for the good of war on the home front.

Here's a bonus answer to your question: yes, we would have an economy if the USA was not engaged in fighting Terrorism. We're not fighting terrorism now, and we still have an economy.

geez, why do so many equate a WAR as a friggin' quagmire?

tabs is spot-on. . ..America wants instant gratification..that everything must be resolved in a one hour.

Iraq is a friggin' WAR. We are not fighting 'insurgence' there. We are fighting terrorist, who are hell bent on seeing America FAIL.

What does "instant gratification" have to do with fiscal responsibility and making excuses that are no longer valid?

So the Bush Administration did the RIGHT thing with it's fiscal policy....operative word..DID.

Can't continue running up the deficit like this.

Oh, gimme a break? Do you actually believe what you've just posted?

If you can't see the one step forward, two steps back scenario perpetuating itself in Iraq, then clearly you just refuse to see it. The administration isn't even mentioning Jan. elections anymore because 1) Kerry'd be all over the unlikelihood of it like a wet rag, and 2) the administration itself knows it's a pipe dream given the unrest in the country.

Insurgents? Bush has used the word many times to describe the enemy we are fighting. Insurgents and terrorists are one in the same to Bush/Cheney.

And yeah, right: Tabs is spot on, not only because it's true, but because this was what the president initially promised. An easy war for downtrodden souls who want democracy. That was a resolved, committed statement from him. He wasn't "just saying."

Well I was on the phone while posting . . .wait; it's fine. Yep!

Iraq is chess, not checkers. THe "checkers" move of jumping king-saddam, was all part of bringing the chess-match to the virgin-seeking terrorists.

This is where we are now. We are lucky (I could have gone for "smart" there). . anyway, lucky that the virgin-seeking terrorists are hell-bent on pushing us out of their sand-box, and give it back to extremists, like them.

Unfortunately, few lib's seemed to have learned from Kerrys 1970's mistakes. Now we have the virgin-seeking terrorists are also hell-bent on pushing out the current leadership; GW Bush, Cheney, Powell, Condi . . .BECAUSE THEN THE AFGAN_IRAQ FALLS BACK TO THEM!

btw, word is the Iraqiis are sick of all these mosque-camping terrorists. They are starting to clean their own house.

Go back to my posts a year ago...I was saying the same thing...Irwreck has always been a mess, it was never a country until the Brits and French made it one...

And Wolfie said the most idiotic thing..."THat reconstructing Irwreck would be no more difficult than reconstructing France after WW2." Phew...

Today we still are fighting a war on Terror...but one has to realize most of it is not seen or heard...it exists in the shadows...

Like Deep Throat said, "Follow the money"....thats one key aspect in fighting Terror, who funds these terrorists..It isn't a glamourous endevor following the money...

Oh and running the deficeit...like the Clinton administration the Bush admininstration is hoping that by growing the economy Taz revenues will pick up..the tax breaks are like priming the pump..to stimulate growth...

Do U really thiink Clinton would have had a surplus if the economy wsn't growing...and don't give me he was so great...


The one thing great about Clinton and the economy was that he did nothing...he kept his hands off...that was partially true becaue the Repblicans controled the Congress for much of his term...you might have to say thanks to Alan Greenspan...for whispering in Clintons ear...and to Robert Ruben as Secratary of the Treasury....Also don't forget that the stage was set by previous administrations for Clinton to reap what they had sown...Remember the Ship of state like the Titanic doesn't respond immediately and takes time to turn....

I ask you this....

Why did Forbes announce recently that there is a record number of US billionaires this year?

http://www.factcheck.org/article118.html

Supposedly, it is seen and exists in Iraq. So WTF? :confused:

Oops, this is the link topic:

GOP fact-twisters claim 80% of the tax relief given to the rich goes to job-creating small businesses. Don't believe it.

http://www.factcheck.org/article118.html

Tabs, you are still not addressing the issue of what's going to be done with the deficit?

(And Bush owes a LOT to Greenspan as well).

Hey cooked_goose, no doubt the Bush smirk has you erked.

We have covered already many of these questions you demand.
So, how about YOU tell us why anyone should vote FOR Kerry.

Not "against Bush" . . . but FOR Kerry. ?

(I imagine the answer is short, in both length and insight.)

That's easy.

For one, root causes of terrorism

Kerry promises to work on getting all the recommendations of the 9/11 commission put into practice. Bush all but ignores these.

yeah? . ... did Bush cause 9/11?

NO! OMG.

But what he's doing now.......

ya mean standing-up for our country? . . .piss'n-off the french, and such?

No, I mean ignoring the many facets that are required to fight a war on terrorism and to protect ourselves within.

And he hasn't just pissed off the french, he's pissed off most of the world.