Help me refute this...

[NuckinFutz]

From an email I was sent. A freeper friend of a non-freeper friend wrote it. I know it's BS, but I need hard data to refute, and i don't have the time to dig right now.


the recession had ended by the time Clinton took office, so he inherited a recovering economy that he drove into the ground, with his SEC allowing the Enrons and WorldComs to practice their fraudulent bookings. He didn't make life good for average Joe, we have better GNP now, less unemployment now, higher paying jobs now, more people own homes now, and less of my pay check going to taxes now, but still he (Pres. Bush) has doubled the spending for the poor, Clinton spent 195 or 12% of the federal budget for the poor, while Bush is spending 345, or 14% of the budget. The only thing going for Bill was the fact he was a smooth talker and made a lot people believe he was doing a good job, and the media bought into the whole lie. The data tell a different story.

[babylonsister]

1. Here's a thread about

Clinton which has more to do with security, but may be useful:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=4379848#4381428

[Coexist]

2. to help you get started:

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article4305.htm

http://www.democraticunderground.com/articles/03/09/p/26_poor.html

http://bushcampaignlies.blogspot.com/2004/03/bush-campaign-lie-4-bush-inherited.html

http://www.brothersjudd.com/blog/archives/2004/01/not_bush_not_clinton_but_green_1.html

[niceypoo]

3. Here is Clintons official Bio on economic matters

The economy has grown for 116 consecutive months, the most in history.

Most New Jobs Ever Created Under a Single Administration

Median Family Income Up $6,000 since 1993 (down under Bush)

Largest Surplus Ever, Largest Three-Year Debt Pay-Down Ever, Lower Federal Government Spending, Reduced Interest Payments on the Debt, Enacted the 1993 Deficit Reduction Plan without a Single Republican Vote.......and so on and so forth.

http://clinton5.nara.gov/WH/Accomplishments/eightyears-03.html

Repukes feel a need to spew propaganda in emails because their agenda is failed and it shows in Bushes poll numbers

[Coexist]

4. More...

http://www.mikehersh.com/President_Clinton_Eight_Great_Years.shtml
<snip>
15 million working families enjoyed tax relief under President Clinton's expanded Earned Income Tax Credit. Thanks to Clinton, the EITC lifted 4.3 million people out of poverty in 1998 alone.

1.5 million children benefited when Clinton more than doubled federal funding for child care.

President Clinton signed a bad "welfare reform" bill in 1996, but Clinton vetoed a worse bill twice, winning concessions each time including - increased child care funding (by $4 billion), worker retraining, extensions for benefits, exceptions for "hard cases" and more.

Clinton increased funding for the Head Start program by 90 percent in FY 2000 so 880,000 children had a better chance to learn and grow.

Clinton forced the minimum wage up from $4.25 to $5.15 per hour and demanded an increase to $6.15.

[ET Awful]

5. Here

http://www.ppionline.org/ppi_ci.cfm?knlgAreaID=107&subsecID=295&contentID=252964

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Jefferson_Clinton#The_economy

http://clinton4.nara.gov/WH/New/html/20000204_3.html

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/1110165.stm

http://www.icasinc.org/lectures/clinton3/c3_03.html

Shall we sum it up from the right's own beloved Greenspan?

"My colleagues and I have been very appreciative of your support of the Fed over the years, and your commitment to fiscal discipline has been instrumental in achieving what in a few weeks will be the longest economic expansion in the nation's history."

[txaslftist]

11. That Greenspan quote is an absolute gem.

Trot that out and add:

"Look, you've been hoodwinked, I don't have the time really to refute you're bogus analysis. If you really want to know the facts, don't just repeat what you hear from some right wing gig. Look up the statistics yourself.

"Your vote and your position has been bought and sold and the Republicans are trading you like a commodity. If you are comfortable with that, then I can't help you. As for me, I'm going to go to objective sources."

[PATRICK]

6. Ok, a data freeper

Statistics is their favorite hammer. To rid oneself of this pest demands either homework or what they have- a source to feed them data and interpretation for the sake of debate. The single source books they read are in large print. The magazines slick and short with reprintable punchlines for disciples. The flattering smug message to them is that they are part of the team and smart and informed. All the rest is window dressing, minimalist, mad and mugging. It's how they sell their core fans things or con them.

Unfortunately, real and competent sources as well as fair analyses are much more laborious to get through and the results are not so blandly simple or unequivocal as your reader's digest pamphleteer or parrot talking points provided by the single source RW machine. You feel your duty as a good guy is to do all the things they don't have to do while they are simply bloviating like the bully's weasely companion.

So they get you bogged down in doing ten times the homework for no conceivable benefit other than your own increasingly irrelevant knowledge of the true facts.

Discrediting the sources of data and interpretation is also laborious, and fruitless and is discounted as evasion with subjective bias.

You might settle for giving a list of truly reliable sources and have them check out the data and get back to you. You can't waste your time on every big mouth with an argument.

An amateur propagandist should be treated like a sports fan defending a team with an impressive array of stats and prejudice. Deflate, out fact, scoff at. Maybe it is not the threatening high level debate they puff out with borrowed sophistry they pretend it to be but pure pigheaded gas. If someone can throw chapter and verse from the Bible and seek to win on points like that I know enough when they are abusing the text and making deliberate mistakes. If one is stung by one's ignorance rest assured in the sense that you know fact checking will likely prove them mostly wrong. the sole goal here is to glorify Bush and damn Clinton. It is a stupid game inspired by their misplaced loyalties. Their public judgment does nothing to positively fulfill the demands of citizenship.

[mcscajun]

8. "So they get you bogged down in doing ten times the homework..."

Yup...and then, when you've done all the work, and turned all the facts back over to them, they denigrate your sources. Mission Not Accomplished. They're going to believe what they want to believe, facts notwithstanding.

It's hardly worth the powder it takes to blow them to hell.

[ProfessorGAC]

9. Well Stated, And May I Add. . .

. . .that the freeper should be requested to provide the actual economic models on which the "recession was over" statement is based. Anecdotal evidence from some right wing rag quoting some idiot economist in the Treasury department (where poor and stupid economists go to work until they die) does not qualify.

In fact, the actual models, such as those i developed back in the mid-80's and have updated annually since then, indicate that there was NEVER a more stable economic time in which the middle class was as well supported to create a strong and consistent consumption base for the growth of both GDP and jobs.

Anyone who states differently is either lying or completely ignorant on the subject.
The Professor

[deutsey]

7. I don't have any data beyond my anecdotal experience

But I personally know many people struggling now economically who were doing quite well after Clinton was elected (myself included). The GOP voted, en masse, not to support Clinton's budget and, as I remember, people I knew were able to make ends meet more easily after it was enacted.

I'm no economist, so take it for what it's worth.

[Patiod]

10. Poverty is also up under Bush

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-0508310153aug31,1,4411549.story?coll=chi-newsnationworld-hed

Those great employment numbers include folks working at Walmart and McDonalds.

[quisp]

12. We have to stop playing the "help me refute this" game...

it's a losing game.

Just say "Prove it. Everything you're saying is a lie. You cannot prove a single thing you're saying. You say "The data tell a different story". What data? Show me your sources. You won't because you can't. And the reason you can't is you are either lying or have been taken in by professional liars like Rush the drug addict or Hannity the tool."

Put the ball BACK in their court.

[mcscajun]

15. Bingo! That's how we should be 'playing' this 'game'

I've fallen into their traps too many times...Let them do the work and prove their assertions before we need to refute or rebut.

The alternative is for us to always be doing the work, and have them call our sources biased, or liars, or both.

Let's put them on the defensive for a change.

[PATRICK]

16. Quickly acquaint yourself with the sources

of the freepers who get book club and leaflet and Internet supports, all geared to passing on talking points with the image of respectability and research. Even the wonkish types seem to have their wheels bogged down in these swamps.

My Uncle George. Who first acquainted me with Mother Jones. He'd get going on controversial things. You'd chime in an add more and agree with him. Then he'd turn around and say you're wrong. The trap works everytime. Say things they would agree with. then with they chime in, burbling with joy to find a friend, you slam every point they make.

It's really debilitating as you are still convinced his general viewpoint
is genuine.

[NuckinFutz]

13. Thanks, everyone...

This info will help. I sent it to my friend for future reference. Can't hammer the guy with it all at once, but my friend may be able to work this info into future conversations with the guy.

[LondonReign2]

14. I sure wish Clinton would come back and

"drive the economy into the ground" some more.

I agree with the others, no amount of facts will sway someone this divorced from reality. Nonetheless...

These charts are always fun, and should easily refute that "unemployment is lower": http://www.academycomputerservice.com/economics/charts.htm

Here is a list of economic accomplishments:
http://clinton4.nara.gov/WH/Accomplishments/economy.html

Fastest and Longest Real Wage Growth in Over Three Decades. In the last 12 months (2000), average hourly earnings have increased 3.8 percent -- faster than the rate of inflation. The United States has had five consecutive years of real wage growth -- the longest consecutive increase since the 1960s. Since 1993, real wages are up 6.5 percent, after declining 4.3 percent during the Reagan and Bush years.