11 thoughts on “Why Americans Don’t Understand What’s Going on in Washington

  1. The quote from the former president is pretty straightforward: “I personally don’t believe we ought to be raising taxes or cutting spending until we get this economy off the ground.”

    First off by Clinton even granting an interview to Newsmax is a bad idea, they will twist what he says no matter what. Second much of the economic woes we have now are due to Clinton’s policies (though they where past by a republican congress he signed them). Bill Clinton is only trying to create some buzz for his Clinton Initiative, with all the muckity mucks at the UN this week he is pimpimg for donations. Bill Clinton knows what he is doing, he’s a back stabber, with a democratic president in power he should keep his trap shut.

  2. Most American don’t know about ellipses, what they are, what they mean, and how they can be used to deceive.

    Let’s say I reviewed a movie this way.
    “This movie is one best examples of the absolute worst movies in the annals of film. A better description might be to take one of the “n”s out of the word “annals.” To call it dreadful would be one of the great understatements in the history of mankind. The only nice thing this reviewer could say is that, as the words “The End” came up, seeing that, it was the best experience of my entire life, second only to the birth of my children!!!”

    Now, how the producers use the review in their ad:
    ‘This movie is one of the best… in the annals of film.’ ‘…It was the best experience of my entire life, second only to the birth of my children!!!”

    The real review makes you think of “Attack of the Killer Tomato’s,” “Plan 9 From Outer Space,” or my personal pick for worst movie ever “The Terror of Tiny Town:”
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Terror_of_Tiny_Town

    The 2nd one makes it seem like a must-see.

    Beware ellipses in the middle of sentences.

  3. How about the egregious practice, rampant on hosted, so-called news programs when the host asks a guest his/her opinion on the issue of the day. The guest spews out his opinion backing it up with completely false statistics. The host says “thank you” and moves on to the next ‘guest.’

    Is this practice due to time constraints? Is it due to the host’s complete ignorance of facts? Is it because the host is committed to disseminating false information and chooses guests who will do just that?

    Whatever it is, it’s practice is rampant. Any program that dares to pose as the news-or-the-day should at least be held to disseminating fact rather than fiction. Is it any wonder that so many Americans are so completely uninformed, misinformed actually on so many issues?

    • Felicity — I hear you. That makes me crazy, too. I understand that part of the problem is that the “moderator” is afraid that if he calls one of the guests a liar, he will be called biased or partisan.

  4. I disagree with twtfltrd. All our economic woes are directly related to George W. Bush, Cheney, et al. not Clinton.

  5. Bonnie – I wish it weren’t so, but Clinton did things that made the Republicans very happy. NAFTA and the repeal of Glass-Steagal, which let the banks get out of boring things like safety, and into high risk endeavors like trading. Of course all this went on steroids after Bush/Cheney got in.

  6. “I disagree with twtfltrd. All our economic woes are directly related to George W. Bush, Cheney, et al. not Clinton”

    I disagree with him as well, it is true that Clinton’s got some skin exposed (the bad economy and how it relates to the fact that he signed two of the worst bills ever(see moonbat)), but calling the former president a pimp is a bit much, even if it is Bill Clinton.

    Attributing this economic mess to politicians only is missing the point. They don’t write the checks or the legislation, they just smile for the camera, when it’s on.

  7. Sadly, I have to agree with both twtfltrd and Moonbat – Bill Clinton signed the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act which repealed Glass-Steagall – it was a monumental mistake that set the stage for economic collapse a decade later. He also signed the rotten Telecommunications Act of 1996 which paved the way for Clear Channel to take over AM radio, and for Murdoch to take over newspapers. It’s true that Republicans in Congress wanted these bills and passed them with enthusiasm, but they wouldn’t have gotten through if Bill Clinton had opposed them. The Republicans did not have a veto-proof majority at that time.

    • Sadly, I have to agree with both twtfltrd and Moonbat – Bill Clinton signed the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act which repealed Glass-Steagall

      Yes, and although Republicans were the ones to initiate that disaster, Democrats in Congress and some White House advisers supported it.

  8. As bad as the distortion was I can’t agree with Clinton. After years in which wealth was moved from lower to upper class the richest have more than they will spend. Customers aren’t buying so companies won’t expand business and hire. This sound like precisely the economy for which steeper tax schedules would be just right for what ails the economy. Mind you, that would in no way tax those without discretionary funds who spend all they have. It would serve to increase spending.

    There’s also this little issue with two expensive wars involving unprecedented numbers of highly paid contractors. WWII was paid off in 5 years by increasing taxes progressively…up to 91% but noooooo, we couldn’t possibly do that again. or could we? It maintained the middle class, caused a boom, and resulted in more paying customers, i.e. good for everyone.

    As bad as the distortions were it still seems like Clinton is painting everyone with the same brush and he doesn’t say who he wouldn’t raise taxes on. Are we to assume he’s talking about everyone? When he doesn’t say he smooths over subtleties…puts the destitute and the billionaires in the same category which is awfully convenient, for someone. As long as we talk about raising taxes as if it must be done in a flat manner we’ll just keep going around in circles and never adequately address our economic problems.

    By the way, Clinton declied to veto Graham-Leach-Blyley which is just a technicality…just as bad as repealing it single-handedly.

Comments are closed.