* Clinton (I'd better spell his name right!!)

Hell Tweety has so much disdain for the public and the Democrats he doesn't even try to hide it.

Tweety this week's AssClown Majorus. The guy can't figure out what he's for or why he's 'for' it.

Pathetic, clueless, fat white idiot who thinks because some media morons pay him an obscene amount of money to bloviate that he has something worthwhile to say.

I think not Tweets.

[Deleted--You are entitled to your point of view. You are NOT entitled to be disrespectful to the site, the community or the contributers. Please keep your posts civil.]

Here's a clip of Cramer going nuts the other day....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cYPtCmdFCrc

Isn't Tweety a moderate? Thass whut it say on his labia.

He doesn't have Clinto Derangement Syndrome

He's just deranged.

Tweety's a GOP-twat.

Remember: the GOP hates our freedoms. They claim that government doesn't work, and then they go and ruin government so it doesn't work. That's Rethug logic for ya.

In the meantime, children die ugly, horrible drowning deaths under broken bridges, soldiers die in a meat-grinder war (that the GOP's children don't fight in), our water quality is becoming poisonous, and people are losing real buying power but working longer hours for low pay. All this while the GOP and its religious attack dogs shove relgion down our throats and the government's nose into our private parts. THIS is what Republicans call America?

They are helping the terrorists win.

Really do not care for this guy's point of view....

But the truth of the matter is that I wonder even if we have anyone in politics with any pull, guts, or stones to protect us?...

After this FISA debacle I'm still blown away....

Your Conscience @ 5:

You have to watch this Cramer meltdown, it is hilarious. He is blowing a gasket because his hedge fund cronies are getting soaked and he cries like a little bitch. He demands the Feds intervene and stop the market correction. WWWWWWWaaaaaaaaaaa!!!!

The housing market is serious as is the record forclosures but this guy is a f'ing loon.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SWksEJQEYVU

While I do not doubt that Cramer is a fucking loon and appears to be whining like a rich boy that lost his Hot Wheels in a game of War, please do not fail to appreciate the impact and fact that many brick and mortar banks, large and small, are heavily invested in CMO's. As the underlying loans bundled in these securitized offerings dwindle in value due to default, the equity in these bundled investments drop. Likewise, a holder's equity on the investment drops. Cash is king.

Are people still desperate enough with Republican bashing to keep up with the Bill Clinton incantations. He cut one of the largest social programs ever in order to surplus the budget! Why this gives Dems any leverage over GOP is beyond me. Clinton was one guy, and not a Dem that I really associate myself with. Anyone remember the DMCA? Hardly the workings of a liberal Dem.

Chris @ 10:

Here's a clip of Cramer going nuts the other day....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cYPtCmdFCrc

ROFLMAO!!!!!!

I had to stop watchin'! Tell me, please, at what point Cramer screamed, "CALGON, TAKE ME AWAY!!!"

Cramer is something of an anomaly. Otherwise, intelligent, logical, and dealing with reality in the world of investments (he does actually know what he is doing..most don't), that shuts down when it comes to politics. That is quite an accomplishment for pettyness, self righteousness, etc.

V V

Tweety will never appear on my TV screen again.

I just want to say a big THANK YOU to Bill Clinton..........I rest my case....

"Economic savvy" is irrelevant when it comes to this Cramer person. Have you seen the videos of his tv tantrums? It doesn't matter what he says -- he cannot be trusted to think clearly.

Watch this, then ask yourself whether this man is thinking rationally:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rOVXh4xM-Ww

[Deleted. Feel free to start your own blog if you don't like how we run ours.]

Cramer is a typical worthless network 'talking head' and as the posted raving video of him Friday shows, he is also dead wrong. The last thing the Federal Reserve should do is lower rates, ‘real’ inflation would continue skyward and the Fed will report the bullshit ‘core’ inflation numbers till Chimp can sneak out the back door in '08.

Cramer had to change his Depends after that outburst. Tweety is irrelevant, the GOPiggies have been spending like meth heads.

Do you trust the democrats anymore???? I don't!!!! Not on anything. They decided to play nice and not upset the apple cart by staying away from impeachment and hoping to win in 2008 as the lesser of two evils, and it turns out that they are the "worser" of the two evils.

At least with the evil greedy horrible skunk republicans you know where you stand. The impotent, whining, incompetent, caving in on every issue, inconstant, "promised too much", pathetic lying weasel democrats just lie all the time and then betray you.

I have felt for sometime that WE are the ones having to lead them kicking and screaming to do what is right, and I'm f*cking sick of it. This isn't what we voted for.

Andy K @ 33:

mudshark @ 30:

The last time we had a balanced budget ...IT WAS BILL CLINTONS FAULT..HAAAAAAAAA...LOL

Well DUH.

Haven't we had the Everything Is Clinton's Fault discussion before? :)

jumpin baby jeeezzuuuuzzzz............I couldn't help myself ANDY.........I pulled that one on a bunch of cons at work..even the gremlin...hehehehehe they didn't know what to think.....(smilin big)

[Critical thought? More like the temper tantrum of a child. No one is forcing you to stay]

As economic elitist member of the ruling class, of course Cramer and Tweety (sounds like a Seinfeld WB collaboration) favor the Republican's handling of the economy. The oligarchs can't stand the thought of we great unwashed masses sharing in "their" pie.

I don't know how anybody has the patience it takes to watch Tweety. He is so boring and it is always so predictable.

Let me guess, he spent no time tonight talking about the FISA mess but devoted his program to some form of Clinton bashing...am I right? If he did discuss FISA, he would have someone who is repugnant on to defend it--like Tony Blankey or Cross-eyed Christie, or any of the other goofballs who promote Bush/Cheney.

I'm actually surprised that he's on since it is August and I am sure that DC is emptied or emptying out. He was on Nantucket this past week and weekend. I'll let my friends here at C&L watch him so I don't have to.

tbhull @ 42:

[Critical thought? More like the temper tantrum of a child. No one is forcing you to stay]

Maybe you should take a class on critical thinking. It doesn't involve criticizing everything.

Let's see..

Democrats in charge:
Y2K a non-issue
1993 WTC terrorists caught, tried, convicted, in jail
Balanced budget
Infrastructure investments
Longest peacetime expansion in the history of the US
Saddam contained
Worldwide respect up
President impeached for getting a BJ

-vs-

Republicans in charge:
Largest terrorist attack in history, no one caught/captured/brought to justice
Largest budget deficits ever
Infrastructure crumbles, citizens die
Lies, fabrications lead to never-ending war
Military stretched so thin, unable to protect the homeland
Unprecendented corruption, scandals
PresidentDictator not impeached (didn't get a BJ)

And it's just not fair the way the republicans are scapegoated with all the problems!

I almost forgot - I'm pissed about the balanced budget BS too (I feel like Cramer!!!!!!!!!!!)

I consider myself a capitalist- I've seen no othe succesful system. But this BS that all gov't regulation is bad just doesn't seem to be borne out empirically. Let's see...

Under Clinton:
1. A little more regulation: environmental, family leave, etc
2. Expansion of social programs social programs
3. Biggest economic growth in history
4. SURPLUS - not balanced, extra

Under Bush
1. Less regulation
2.Cutting programs
3. Maybe growth/ maybe not depending on what indicators you look at
4. Debt, and lots of it

If regulation is SO deliterious to the economy, how come it isn't?

Sorry J*, I stole your format :)

They should give Cosmo Kramer a show. He makes more sense than both of these kool-aid kowboys put together.

Chuck @ 53:

Coke or Pepsi Coke or Pepsi Coke or Pepsi I SAY ORANGE JUICE!

Free OJ!

mudshark @ 29:

I just want to say a big THANK YOU to Bill Clinton..........I rest my case....

I agree with you 100%. In fact, I was so pissed off, after hearing Chris Matthews go off, I wrote him the following e-mail:

I have one question to ask you Mr. Matthews: After Bill Clinton’s economic policies and George W. Bush’s economic policies, which made our economy better? Your claim that gave the Republican Party free, or I think it was free, talking points supports what most bloggers think of your frequent tendency to, from one day to another, blast the Democratic political Party. I know you would call it balance, but I don’t.

Joseph

I am so tired of his "off on" comments for and against the Democrats. The only thing that does not change for Matthews is his hatred for Hillary Clinton. She must of blasted him one day. He 24/7 hatred of anything Hillary stands to be the only thing that does not change for one day to the next.

Matthews is a very driving force over at MSNBC, and at times, I have watched this "half cocked" nut case flat out campaign for Republicans on his show. In last years Democratic drive to change the leadership in both houses, Matthews discredited almost every prediction the Democrats were winning their objectives. He knows media is power, and he knows how to use it. We have not heard the last of this manipulator.

Joseph

Re ANDY K at 49 and 55

Isn't repetition grounds for deletion?

Andy K @ 59:

Sorry about the redundancy. Somethin' weird happened, never saw the first comment post. Whoops!

Somethin' weird happened,

Maybe your dog ate your homework too...lolo just teasing, nuttin' personal...

Chuck @ 62:

Re ANDY K at 49 and 55

Isn't repetition grounds for deletion?

Not when it's unintended, Chuck. I wouldn't gripe if the site monitor deleted the second.

This used to happen all the time, way back in the HaloScan days.

HaloScan sucks! I blame Bill Clinton!

Well, I am more economically savvy than Jim, having never managed to bankrupt a hedge-fund, and what I would tell Jim is that the federal deficit is currently around 8 trillion dollars. Of that amount, roughly 500 billion dollars has already been pissed down the Iraqi rathole. We have an additional 70 TRILLION or so dollars in unfunded liabilities, meaning that there is no honest way we can just pass the buck (social security, for instance) and no honest way to actually pay for them. Now, what this means, and what Jim Cramer will never say, because he has a vested interest in keeping the shell game going as long as he can, is that the only way the government is going to meet its obligations is to inflate its way out of them. That means that we can all be prepared for the dollar--which is now worth about 10 cents in 1950 terms--to inflate again, until it is worth more like 1 cent in 1950 terms. The government won't come to an end. You'll just discover that you can't buy a new house, because you'll be getting paid roughly 100,000 dollars for a mundane, low-level job, but houses will a split-level three-bedroom will be selling for 6 million.

Chuck @ 64:

Andy K @ 59:

Sorry about the redundancy. Somethin' weird happened, never saw the first comment post. Whoops!

Somethin' weird happened,

Maybe your dog ate your homework too...lolo just teasing, nuttin' personal...

S'okay, didn't take it personally! I can get as well as I give! :)

[Please restrict your comments to the topic and not other posters]

Chuck @ 67:

mudshark @ 63:

nothing personal Chuck........oj good...

Better than those Coke drinkin Democrats

shirley you must mean those coke snortin child molsetin republicans....didn't another one get introuble recently.....with the McCain campaign or was it the Gullianni campaign....oh wait ...it was both...haaaaaaaaaaa

mudshark @ 74:

Chuck @ 67:

mudshark @ 63:

nothing personal Chuck........oj good...

Better than those Coke drinkin Democrats

shirley you must mean those coke snortin child molsetin republicans....didn't another one get introuble recently.....with the McCain campaign or was it the Gullianni campaign....oh wait ...it was both...haaaaaaaaaaa

Nope, Republicans drink Pepsi, I am giving up my Coca Cola habit and switching to OJ...now where did I leave Ralph's phone number... must send more checks....

myiq2xu @ 75:

Sorry chuck, it's past beer-thirty. I was referring to TB, not you Dunno WTF happened

That's too bad, I always fancied myself as a rich white kid...

In terms of trying to control the deficit, Carter and Clinton were the only presidents in the last 4 decades who really tried. Both had some success. Both were denigrated by the repukes as being fiscally irresponsible, anyway; and the the repukes went and spent us into a hole so deep we may as well forget about ever getting out of it.

And it's easy to see that, within a month or 2 of the next inauguration, Tweety and Cramer will be talking about how the Democratic Administration doesn't seem to be able to get a handle on the deficit. They were pretty damned quiet about the $%#@! deficit while Bush was letting it skyrocket. Oh, I'm sorry, it's the war that's causing it, huuh? You mean the illegal, unnecessary mess that Buttchops and Cheney got us into by lying repeatedly, that war? You mean the war that was going to cost us a negative $6 billion because Wulfie Wulfowitz promised that it would pay for itself, that war? You mean the war that President Moron waged and, for the first time in American history, refused to raise taxes to pay for, that war?

Here's Tweety in February, 2009: Well, she talked a good game while she was running for office, but President Clinton has had a month to end the war and bring the troops home and, as typical for a Democrat, she hasn't been able to do it!

These guys, in the final analysis, are all bullpoopers who either lie through their straightened teeth or honestly don't know what the frack they're talking about. America promotes dumb asses into high paying positions in the corporate media. America votes dumb asses into office. America cheers for dumb ass drug-sucking athletes. I'm not ashamed, I'm just very, very sorry for this country.

please. the conservative party is not the old conservative party. there's NO fiscal responsibility with these neocons today. from the medicare prescription drug plan (drug lobbyist's bill) to the "who gives a shit about the katrina blacks" attitude, these pricks simply dont give a shit about the poor or middle class workers. Tweety, go smell fred thompson some more you tool.

can't go with Nadar......all those lost votes are one of the reasons we're in this mess. sorry Chuck...If the next election is close.....????

Pile @ 73:

steve davis @ 68:

Well, I am more economically savvy than Jim, having never managed to bankrupt a hedge-fund, and what I would tell Jim is that the federal deficit is currently around 8 trillion dollars. Of that amount, roughly 500 billion dollars has already been pissed down the Iraqi rathole. We have an additional 70 TRILLION or so dollars in unfunded liabilities, meaning that there is no honest way we can just pass the buck (social security, for instance) and no honest way to actually pay for them. Now, what this means, and what Jim Cramer will never say, because he has a vested interest in keeping the shell game going as long as he can, is that the only way the government is going to meet its obligations is to inflate its way out of them. That means that we can all be prepared for the dollar--which is now worth about 10 cents in 1950 terms--to inflate again, until it is worth more like 1 cent in 1950 terms. The government won't come to an end. You'll just discover that you can't buy a new house, because you'll be getting paid roughly 100,000 dollars for a mundane, low-level job, but houses will a split-level three-bedroom will be selling for 6 million.

I agree.

And for this reason, any of you who have any significant debt better get out of it ASAP or you'll be looking for a new split level cardboard box on Sunset Blvd.

Nope. If we're going to hit double digit inflation, the time to get into debt is now, before it hits the fan. If you have a long term debt with a locked in interest rate, at any rate, inflation can be a boon. The $3,000 you pay each month will stay static, even while the 1950's value of that $3,000 drops lower and lower. Of course, your income has to stay abreast of inflation -- or nearly so.

votingvet @ 80:

In terms of trying to control the deficit, Carter and Clinton were the only presidents in the last 4 decades who really tried. Both had some success. Both were denigrated by the repukes as being fiscally irresponsible, anyway; and the the repukes went and spent us into a hole so deep we may as well forget about ever getting out of it.

And it's easy to see that, within a month or 2 of the next inauguration, Tweety and Cramer will be talking about how the Democratic Administration doesn't seem to be able to get a handle on the deficit. They were pretty damned quiet about the $%#@! deficit while Bush was letting it skyrocket. Oh, I'm sorry, it's the war that's causing it, huuh? You mean the illegal, unnecessary mess that Buttchops and Cheney got us into by lying repeatedly, that war? You mean the war that was going to cost us a negative $6 billion because Wulfie Wulfowitz promised that it would pay for itself, that war? You mean the war that President Moron waged and, for the first time in American history, refused to raise taxes to pay for, that war?

Here's Tweety in February, 2009: Well, she talked a good game while she was running for office, but President Clinton has had a month to end the war and bring the troops home and, as typical for a Democrat, she hasn't been able to do it!

These guys, in the final analysis, are all bullpoopers who either lie through their straightened teeth or honestly don't know what the frack they're talking about. America promotes dumb asses into high paying positions in the corporate media. America votes dumb asses into office. America cheers for dumb ass drug-sucking athletes. I'm not ashamed, I'm just very, very sorry for this country.

Me to. I was out on the porch today watching a storm come. For some reason I began to sing, "My country, tiss of thee, sweet land of Liberty........and I broke down and cried for our country and all the Liberty lost, all the lives lost. Sorry. I'm an old woman who remembers how this country used to stand for something. Can't help feeling the loss.

votingvet @ 86:

Pile @ 73:

steve davis @ 68:

Well, I am more economically savvy than Jim, having never managed to bankrupt a hedge-fund, and what I would tell Jim is that the federal deficit is currently around 8 trillion dollars. Of that amount, roughly 500 billion dollars has already been pissed down the Iraqi rathole. We have an additional 70 TRILLION or so dollars in unfunded liabilities, meaning that there is no honest way we can just pass the buck (social security, for instance) and no honest way to actually pay for them. Now, what this means, and what Jim Cramer will never say, because he has a vested interest in keeping the shell game going as long as he can, is that the only way the government is going to meet its obligations is to inflate its way out of them. That means that we can all be prepared for the dollar--which is now worth about 10 cents in 1950 terms--to inflate again, until it is worth more like 1 cent in 1950 terms. The government won't come to an end. You'll just discover that you can't buy a new house, because you'll be getting paid roughly 100,000 dollars for a mundane, low-level job, but houses will a split-level three-bedroom will be selling for 6 million.

I agree.

And for this reason, any of you who have any significant debt better get out of it ASAP or you'll be looking for a new split level cardboard box on Sunset Blvd.

Nope. If we're going to hit double digit inflation, the time to get into debt is now, before it hits the fan. If you have a long term debt with a locked in interest rate, at any rate, inflation can be a boon. The $3,000 you pay each month will stay static, even while the 1950's value of that $3,000 drops lower and lower. Of course, your income has to stay abreast of inflation -- or nearly so.

Yes... the key is to lock in a fixed interest rate. If it fluctuates like in a credit card or adjustable rate loan... forget it. In fact, the reason why there are all these mortgage foreclosures recently is because people got suckered into an adjustable rate, and then when the Fed raised interest rates in the past 2-3 years to help boost a weak dollar... those people were SOL.

This nonsense about balanced budgets are just a ruse to keep the government from using spending to get us out of a recession. Social Security was intended as a pay-as-you-go program, which means we don't need the lockbox and keeping the money out of the economy makes no sense anyway. We should be spending the money on education, healthcare, and things that would provide jobs.
Inflation's just another bogeyman as well. Wages generally go up with inflation (within reason, of course).

Chuck @ 91:

mudshark @ 84:

can't go with Nadar......all those lost votes are one of the reasons we're in this mess. sorry Chuck...If the next election is close.....????

My tongue was in my cheek but only a little bit. I understand and agree with your argument but the Dems need to be threatened with loss. If the Repubs can pander to their base, why are the Dems so estranged from theirs?

Frankly, the next election is giving me strong Dukakis like vibes

Tongue-in-cheek or not, it's a whole lot better seein' old Ralphie-boy's name rather than He-Who-Ran-Fer-President-As-A-Libertarian-In-1988. That guy's trolls have been invadin' C&L en masse.

Cramer probably likes that guy- except that that guy wouldn't betray his own ideals to bail out the market when it fell on hard times. Or would he?

Andy K , guess what? I think Paul is the best candidate the Republicans could nominate.

Chuck @ 96:

Andy K , guess what? I think Paul is the best candidate the Republicans could nominate.

yeah...THAT would be a good thing.......it would make it all that much easier...BUT...there is no way the repub base would do it...which in a way is even better.

Andy K @ 94:

Chuck @ 91:

mudshark @ 84:

can't go with Nadar......all those lost votes are one of the reasons we're in this mess. sorry Chuck...If the next election is close.....????

My tongue was in my cheek but only a little bit. I understand and agree with your argument but the Dems need to be threatened with loss. If the Repubs can pander to their base, why are the Dems so estranged from theirs?

Frankly, the next election is giving me strong Dukakis like vibes

Tongue-in-cheek or not, it's a whole lot better seein' old Ralphie-boy's name rather than He-Who-Ran-Fer-President-As-A-Libertarian-In-1988. That guy's trolls have been invadin' C&L en masse.

Cramer probably likes that guy- except that that guy wouldn't betray his own ideals to bail out the market when it fell on hard times. Or would he?

First, Dukakis was hardly in anything resemblin' a "can't lose" situation. Not that any of the current Dems are in that situation, but it's obvious that the next GOP candidate won't be coastin' on the legacy of Stupor Mundi as HW coat-tailed Raygun.

Second, Kucinich is the candidate who does mirror the base of the Democratic Party. Anti-War, Universal Health Care, pro-Labor, pro-Middle Class, Enviromentally conscientous....But the question is this: Does Kucinich have a shred of cross-over appeal? He's kinda nebbishy, sure, but if his wife has a brain that matches the rest of her she could be a big factor in sellin' Denny to the general public.

The GOP seems to be askin' fer Hillary to be the candidate, but they must be aware of how many women who would normally vote Republican would split the ticket to vote fer a woman- specially a woman who is, fer the most, to the right of her fellow Dems. No, I won't vote fer her in the primary- I'd vote fer any other Dem(save fer Senator Bankruptcy Bill Biden) in that function. But if, in November of '08, Senator Clinton is the candidate, I'll vote for her. 'Cause I'm a yellow dog Democrat- and proud of it!

mudshark @ 98:

Chuck @ 96:

Andy K , guess what? I think Paul is the best candidate the Republicans could nominate.

yeah...THAT would be a good thing.......it would make it all that much easier...BUT...there is no way the repub base would do it...which in a way is even better.

If ya go back two open threads, you'll find my thoughts on Paul.

Okay, no need to search. I think that the GOP has finally got it's own Lyndon LaRouche. The funny thing is that their LaRouche looks sane compared to the rest of their field.

Tweety is such a disgusting revisionist shill sometimes. He has it in for the Clintons so bad he can't even acknowledge that Clinton balanced a budget, so its not such a hard concept for Americans to grasp that another Democratic president would do so again. Go back to speculating on Thompson's aquavelva, beltway idiot.

Chuck @ 96:

Andy K , guess what? I think Paul is the best candidate the Republicans could nominate.

And, in specific regard to that comment, yeah, I'll agree. But that's kinda like callin' him the prettiest man in the penitentiary, no?

mudshark @ 107:

ok last one for this topic...WHERE THE HELL DID THEY FIND THIS LUNATIC CRAMER????one would think if their going to talk money.....one name..........GREENSPAN.......sheeesh

Hey, it's commercial television. Excitement sells. He could be another Ruckheyser, be right most of the time, but who'd tune in?

Goodnight, muddy and Chuck! Gotta be up and at it at 6:30!

A.Citizen @ 6:

Tweety this week's AssClown Majorus. The guy can't figure out what he's for or why he's 'for' it.

Pathetic, clueless, fat white idiot who thinks because some media morons pay him an obscene amount of money to bloviate that he has something worthwhile to say.

I think not Tweets.

Word!!

Hey Chuckie.....you wouldn't be the former coach of the Raiders would you or maybe your working in Tampa now.....(just kidding)LOL

This has to be a hoax because the honest, patriotic, and very good-looking, we've been told, Ms. Coulter has informed me that Mathews is a liberal.

Chris Matthews was also STUNNED that anyone could characterize the Democrats as better at cutting taxes than the Republicans. Obviously, the Americans who responded to that poll know a lot more about the real history of tax policy and how it has effected their lives positively or negatively than Matthews ever will.

The two most famous Republican "tax cutters" in the modern age are Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush. In fact, their supporters will tell you all about it at the drop of a hat.

- Reagan cut taxes BUT he also eliminated most of the Investment Tax Credits in the tax code in the name of "simplification", which effectively left most American tax payers with no advantage at all (remember all those large tax deductions we used to get on credit card interest rates, auto loan interest rates, etc. that were whittled down to just the mortgage interest deductions after Reagan "simplified" the tax code?). Later, Reagan raised taxes 3 times. Bush the First famously broke his 1988 campaign promise to "read my lips, no new taxes" by adding new taxes.

- Bush the Second cut taxes primarily on the top margins, which has done virtually nothing to expand the economy or create new jobs since most of those people took the tax savings and invested it overseas. But for most other tax payers, their paltry tax cut was just got flushed down their gas tanks a couple of days ago.

The following are Democratic administration tax cuts that have actually created real wealth for more Americans than a dozen piddling marginal tax rate shifts signed into legislation by a dozen Republican administrations ever could, although it is rarely mentioned by anyone, including their supporters:

- Capital gains tax cut from 39% to 28% (Jimmy Carter, first Capital gains tax cut in 15 years)
- Capital gains tax cut from 28% to 20% (Bill Clinton, a greater percentage cut than either Reagan or Bush the Second)
- Signing into tax code legislation the HUGE tax advantaged 401K provision (Jimmy Carter 1978)
- Signing into legislation the HUGE wealth-building total tax exemption (read: TAX CUT) on the first $500,000 (married) or $250,000 (single) equity on the sale of a primary residence after only two years occupancy in the previous five years...as many times as you want in your lifetime (Bill Clinton)
- JFK famously CUT TAXES.

Folks, THOSE are important, meaningful TAX CUTS. And Democratic presidents signed them into legislation.

Most, if not all, of the piddling tax cuts by Republican administrations are more than offset by whatever other economic or foreign policy disaster they can't seem to avoid.

I wouldn't trust a Republican with a piggy bank and a calculator, frankly.

Since the economic data all the way back to Nixon not only doesn't support their statements but indicates that contrary, this colourful exchange doesn't really deserve any serious thought other than a reflection on how public perception is so erroneously twisted.

As Americans, when your children and grandchildren will be paying taxes in exchange for... nothing except paying down the debt to creditors, you have Ronald Reagan (above all) to thank for.

Three words: Starve The Beast.

It's the neocon's published strategy. So, yes, the Democrats can be trusted more than the Republicans on this one.

"Hard-Ball" should be called "Hard-Bawl" boohoo! waaaa!

The way the Democratic campaign is going, you'd think that the debate over whose health care program would be better is so vital, but the horrendous fact is that as long as Diebold prospers, and it will according to Democratic Senator Feinstein, what the hell is the use? We all know that the GOP will "win" just as it did in the last two elections, and things will only get worse. I have to laugh though: Hillary Clinton, the weather vane, who has always waited to see what everyone else says first, before she comes out with her health program, she who is the second highest accepting of Lobbyist corruption health money, one has to remember: It doesn't matter.

Next, Mr Hardball will say he can't believe 70% favor pulling out or Iraq when we are so obviously winning. The polls MUST be wrong.

Um, Reagan couldn't balance a budget and he didn't even have a war.

"...even the best Democrats will admit,..." In other words, any Democrat that proposes responsible taxing and spending (like for inspecting bridges) is stealing your money.

Who can doubt anymore that Chris Matthews is as much a Republican as this Cramer douche bag?

The Republican Platform is built on two words "cheap labor". The invasion of Iraq is the first step in establishing a US led global corporate empire, with a wealthy corporate elite living off of a global pool of “cheap labor”. Look at the vast amounts of money that are being poured into Iraq. This is bankruptcy by design because the best way to demonize and fight social programs is to drain them. Cheap labor conservatives can't have programs designed to lift people up to improve their lives because they need for the larger working force to be pushed down so far that they have no choice but to work for low wages. Republicans have opposed every improvement in wages and working conditions in US history. The first thing Bush did when he stole the office of the presidency was to bring back the very deficits Clinton had eliminated. Not one single Republican presidency has EVER balanced a budget, and this is not mistake on their part either.

"Oh, and there is that pesky little fact that the last Democrat who lived in the White House not only balanced the budget, but left a surplus when he left office…"

Good job at telling only half of the truth.

What you failed to mention is that the Democrat you refer to had to work with an opposition Congress. Neither party will balanace the budget when they have both Congress and the White House. And both side use the claims of a plans to balance the budget as daggers to poke at the other side, yet once they find themselves in a position to live up to the promise, they go back on their word.

I guess they think the corruption and bankruptcy of this country is OK as long as as they aren't effected.
 
Who cares about others and the future of others.  As long as your in the circle and not effected.
 
 That is a big part of the problem.

"if it were not for the war" ???? as if the war is some accidental happening????

Jesus Murphy, they are spending 11 billion a month on that fucking war. Bridges are not being repaired, Katrina victims were left out in the cold, education was decimated, health care continues to be for profit. The WAR REFLECTS THE TOTALITY OF REPUBLICANISM... greed, waste, lies, avarice, negligence, incompetence. This is what they did with their power.

Both of these guys are clueless blow hards. Clinton dug this country out of a $300Bn deficit and left with a $526Bn surplus. He and Gore were the ones who streamlined a completely bloated, inept and outdated government. That surplus didn't last through the first quarter of chimpy dick.

The only other president in recent history to run a surplus was LBJ (Dem). Without exception, every single repug president has left this country in worse a budgetary state that when he started.

Tweety should stop sniffing glue before his show and actually do some reading. I guess it's too much to ask for an informed media in this country.

Matthews and Cramer are clueless. All they have to do is look at the data. Just look at the national debt for example. Heck, the Bush Administration has added more to it than all 42 other Presidents combined. In fact, they will soon have to raise the debt ceiling as its hovering around $8.937 trillion right now. Then you can take a look at the dollar. That thing is hovering around record lows against all other currencies around the globe. Its comical when I hear that Republicans are "fiscally responsible". If the Republicans are fiscally responsible I would hate to see what they consider fiscally irresponsible.

Note to Chris Matthews: STFU.

Thank you.

Those fiscally conservative Repubs have done a great job when it comes to saving government money. Just look at how well the budget was balanced under Reagan, Bush Sr. and the Shrub. Look at how little money was spent in areas such as military and war expenditures. But most importantly, look at how they reduced middle class taxes. That $400 dollars back from the shrub was less than 1/100 of what I already pay in taxes.

But it's the thought that counts. They call themselves fiscally conservative, ergo they must be good at conserving fiscally.

/sarcasm

More important than balancing the federal budget is understanding the quality of investment that government is making for future tax receipts. I would rather see the government run a budget deficit IF it was making quality investments in education and alternative energy research, rather than see the government run a surplus and make terrible spending decisions like the Iraq War and the senior prescription drug benefit plan (both of which have negative rates of return). Run this parallel in your own personal life (education loans vs. a credit card weekend in vegas) to understand that not all deficts are created equal.

What everyone is missing here is that acumulated borrowing is a very small portion of future GDP - provided that GDP continues to grow. That is the key. What will be growth rate in future years? A 2% average growth rate vs. 4.5% can mean all the difference. Ultimately U.S. bonds are priced on the perception of our future ability to pay. Of course, the year to year deficts cannot get too far out of wack. This is why Clinton had to make the tough decisions in 93-94 to break the GAP.

Not fair? What is this a grammer school fight? That's where everyone swings their fist in the air, and if the other guy gets hit at all is because he walked into it, before a teacher or a crack dealer breaks them up.