Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Election 2008

Was the Clinton Era Good for the Working Class? Ohio Primary Will Tell

By JoAnn Wypijewski, The Nation. Posted March 1, 2008.


The blue collar vote is on the line in the Buckeye State -- and so is the myth of Clinton-era good times.
Advertisement

Three weeks before the primary there was hardly a yard sign to be seen for any of the presidential candidates. On the rise of frozen grass in front of Steel Workers Local 1123 bold red, white and blue letters urge Elect Hiles, State Representative. The Local's president, Randy Feemster, wore a T-shirt sporting the same message for Richard Hiles, who worked at the Timken steel plant here for thirty-eight years. "There are Democrats, and there are labor Democrats, you know what I mean?" Feemster said. He is a big man with a thick, powerful build. But "to tell you the truth," he said when we first met, "I feel like a little bird that was flying, flying and then hit the glass, and now I'm just lying there by the window, stunned." The Steel Workers had backed John Edwards, and when he dropped out, Feemster says, "we had our heart broken."

Across town at Communications Workers Local 4302, four out of five workers I spoke with were similarly dashed and undecided. Edwards had shown up on picket lines and at union rallies, embracing issues that, they said, involved them mentally, emotionally, financially. No other candidate has yet picked up that baton with the same conviction, and the CWA International has not endorsed a candidate because its membership is split. One of the workers I met, Blanche McKinney, 59, is backing Hillary Clinton, as is the Local's vice president, Bob Wise. Experience. Problem-solving. Day one. The reasons McKinney gave for her choice are bullet points of the Clinton campaign. And then there's Bill. "I feel Bill gave me eight good years," she said.

The standard narrative of 1990s prosperity, and thus Bill Clinton's most important remaining legacy, is on the line in Ohio's primary. That, as much as Hillary's flagging electoral fortunes, is why Ohio is a must-win for the Clintons. In the same way that South Carolina shattered the myth of Bill as America's first black President, Ohio could shatter the myth of generalized Clinton-era good times.

Other states' primaries might have done the same; Virginia and Wisconsin broke Hillary's presumed lock on the white working-class vote. But for myriad reasons, earlier primaries did not searingly confront the campaigns with the issue of working-class decline. Decline is everywhere apparent in Ohio, where as a direct result of the North American Free Trade Agreement, 45,734 jobs were lost between 1995 and 2003. That only skims the surface of loss, because for every shutdown factory there are concentric bands of devastation, from direct support industries to the small businesses that depended on the custom of hourly workers to the schools that can't win new levies because people are taxed out. NAFTA sliced the skin, and the bleeding continues. After LTV Steel closed in Cleveland in 2001, according to Don Singer, a former official who worked with the state labor department, 3,100 businesses went down with it. Between November 1999 and November 2003, according to Policy Matters Ohio, the state had a net loss of 244,000 nonagricultural jobs. Today Ohio is the seventh-worst state in the country for finding a job.

Local 1123 is down to 2,400 members, while also servicing 6,000 retirees, and neither Obama nor Clinton has an answer for Feemster and other union leaders who again and again concede on wages to maintain company-paid health benefits and retiree pensions. Even before Edwards dropped out, the Democratic Leadership Council was congratulating itself that none of the top contenders favored a single-payer health insurance system, which Feemster supports. Nevertheless, he was waiting to be wooed by one of the candidates.

It is remarkable that, when we met in mid-February, he hadn't been. Stark County is an important swing county, and Feemster has long been key to mobilizing labor support in elections. Elsewhere I met other experienced election organizers whose only contact with the campaigns has come through robocalls. My requests to both campaigns for their county coordinators' contact information went unanswered. It is as if no one had thought that Ohio would matter, that industrial unions would matter; as if these workers who say they often feel forgotten actually have been, even for the cynical aim of vote-rustling. In such circumstances, it is hard to know what might tip a vote. In Feemster's case it was a talk with Bill Clinton versus a meeting with Obama surrogates. The one, he said, gave specific answers to specific questions, even if Feemster didn't always agree; the others, no way as close to their candidate, danced around the issues. "Will Obama do away with NAFTA?" They waffled about legalisms; Bill said Hillary will fix it, and expounded beyond what Feemster had already heard about both candidates from the TV news shows that have become the background music in his house. Local 1123 cannot endorse a candidate, but with two weeks to go it rented part of its hall to the Clinton camp: "They were the first to ask." With less than a week to go, no one had yet shown up to work.


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: ohio, election 2008, hillary clinton, barack obama

JoAnn Wypijewski, a former senior editor of The Nation, is based in New York City.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Election 2008! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Terrorist
Posted by: HeKnew on Mar 1, 2008 12:12 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Direct Primaries!

Direct Elections!

Direct Democracy!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Sideways Wages and Rising Prices- What Do YOU Think?
Posted by: NoPCZone on Mar 1, 2008 1:15 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Bill campaigned against NAFTA as Bush I negotiated it and then signed it largely untouched after he got in. His wife effed up a real chance at getting Universal Coverage for all Americans. The corruption that spawned Global Crossing, ENRON and most of the Tech Bubble happened on his watch. He re-appointed Alan Greenspan to the Fed.
He ruled like a second term for Bush I.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Terrorist
Posted by: HeKnew on Mar 1, 2008 3:38 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Clinton era was good for the working class as long as you kept working.

Billybob triangulated the welfare net right out of existence.


Yes, we will

Government of the people, by the people and for the people.

Direct Democracy

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Terrorist Posted by: Cooltruth
» RE: Terrorist Posted by: snarlah
» RE: Terrorist Posted by: mclemens
Will Ohio vote determine who's viewed as more the populist?
Posted by: nochicagoboys on Mar 1, 2008 4:30 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Also, economically, is Ohio the proverbial canary in the coal mine for the rest of the country?

Any Ohioans out there care to comment?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The "Best" of Times
Posted by: Tom Degan on Mar 1, 2008 5:05 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
For a real good debunking of the so-called "good times" of the Clinton era, read The Best of Times: America in the Clinton Years by Haynes Johnson.

The fact that Senator Clinton is being beaten so soundly by a virual unknown in her own parties primaries should tell us that she is unelectable. If she is able to win this thing fairly and squarely, that is just something that Barack Obama supporters will just have to deal with. If, on the other hand, the Clintonistas are able to steal this thing via the uber delegates, count on a stampede to Ralph Nader.

Tom Degan
Goshen, NY
Oh, Ralph, you've done it again

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: The "Best" of Times Posted by: willymack
» RE: The "Best" of Times Posted by: mclemens
No
Posted by: jim_altman on Mar 1, 2008 5:24 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Once again, a journalist confuses opinion with fact. Alternet cannot alter the economic statistics of the Clinton era anymore than conservative opinion could create weapons of mass destruction. The myth to debunk here is the myth of the mandate of public opinion. It is the primary reason why we're in the quagmire we're in today. Want real change? Want leaders with integrity? Outlaw specious polling and require journalists to report facts they've thoroughly researched rather than novel story lines they've fallen in love with or information they've cherry-picked and stove-piped from unnamed reliable sources.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: No Posted by: jvaljon1
"He's a man of the people."
Posted by: MobileSucks on Mar 1, 2008 5:35 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
My black friends are as steadfast in their belief that Bill Clinton was on their side and things were better for them because of Bill as are talk radio fans are in their conviction that "the first black President" is in league with Satan. There is no changing minds in either case. Or there hasn't been. Obama needs to not only speak of hopefulness and our collective ability to change - but talk more about reality. But we know what happens to candidates when they do that. And besides, how different is he from Clinton (Hilliary)?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: "He's a man of the people." Posted by: cyrena1987
» RE: "He's a man of the people." Posted by: MobileSucks
Was Clinton Era good for the workingclass?
Posted by: greenpagan on Mar 1, 2008 5:36 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Was the Clinton Era good for the Workingclass?

Not really. The tech boom led to a reasonably generalized prosperity. But whether that had anything to do with what the Clinton Administration did is another matter. Presidents usually just take credit if they back into good economies, like kings and chieftains would take credit for good crops.

Class warfare has always been going on in this country and in all capitalist countries and in any hierarchical culture. But, since 1981 and the advent of Reaganism-Thatcherism class warfare has been waged from the top down with a vengeance. Time to reverse that historical trend.

The Clintons went against their own party to pass things like NAFTA and welfare "reform" which was actually an attack on the Social Security Act's AFDC provisions. Only a traitorous dog Democrat could've done that!

Hillary blew Healthcare once. Why give her another chance to muck things up? The Clintons had their innings. That said, she'd make a good VP if only she could get her ego out of the way and keep Bill's snout in a muzzle and on a short leash.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Totally Irrelevant Posted by: improperly_sedated
» RE: Totally Irrelevant Posted by: Bozwell
The Problem with Bill
Posted by: Urstrly on Mar 1, 2008 5:42 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
All those people who think Hillary knows what to do on Day One should just picture what it'll be like once the Clintons are back "home" in the White House. Who could possibly operate as vice president with Bill in residence? She second-guessed him when he was president, you have to assume he'll return the favor. And then he'll get bored and start catting around, and the talk show hosts will start in on him, and her effectiveness will be on a par with George W. Bush's. That may be fine with those folks at the VFW, but not with anyone who is concerned about the future of our country.

We need a fresh start.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: The Problem with Bill Posted by: Cooltruth
MyTake
Posted by: KarenS on Mar 1, 2008 6:19 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
At least Clinton tries to talk about issues and solutions. Obama is like the silver tongued devil who sell you a vaccum cleaner that works for a month and then you can't find anyone in customer service to help you fix it when it breaks. I have always been in the middle middle class, now sinking into the lower middle class. All I know is that I and my circle of friends both male and female were a lot more economically secure and able to meet the bills during the 90s. Even Republicans give Hillary credit for being a workhorse in the Senate. If a uber conservative like Sam Brownback can ask her forgiveness for saying nasty things about her, then finding that he was wrong with his assumptions, I would think that fairness should extend to the so-called rightous left.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Hillary Work Horse Posted by: lifeaholic
» RE: MyTake Posted by: Bozwell
The videos Hillary does NOT want you to see!
Posted by: jhecht on Mar 1, 2008 6:42 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Check out the following videos on Youtube about Hillary. Then spread 'em far & wide...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xq8aopATYyw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AMfUajhL24I&feature=related

I had thought of Hillary as just another machine politician. These videos make it clear that she is far worse... Not that Obama is perfect, but he's IMHO a lot less evil.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» HILLARY Posted by: lifeaholic
CLINTON MYTH GOOD TIMES
Posted by: lifeaholic on Mar 1, 2008 7:06 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Blarney Baloney by Conservatives
Shame on any Democrat for repeating such junk
Clinton Years were Best Years of Our lives.For All.
Short Memories. All signs-HELP WANTED. Start at $7-9 per hour

No such signs since Clinton left.

Clinton Fiscal Policies started the boom.
PRAISE CLINTON AND GORE WITH PLEASURE
GDP--rose from 6,300 to 11,600
NATIONAL INCOME-5,000 to 8,000 Billion--
JOBS CREATED—237,000 per month to replace Jimmy Carter record of 218,000.
AVERAGE WEEKLY EARNINGS--$360 to $478
AVERAGE WEEKLY HOURS WORKED--never hit 35.0--hit that mark 4 times in 80's
UNEMPLOYMENT--from 7.2% down down down to as low as 3.9%
MINIMUM WAGE--$4.25 to $5.15
MINORITIES--did exceedingly well
HOME OWNERSHIP--hit all time high (no big deal most can say this-except Reagan)
DEFICIT--290 Billion to whoopee a SURPLUS
DEBT----+28%---300% increase over prior 12 years by Conservatives.
FEDERAL SPENDING--+28%---+80% under Reagan- who is da true conservative?
DOW JONES AVERAGE—3,500 to 11,720 top in 2000. All it's history to get to 3500 and Clinton zooms it
NASDAQ--700 to 5,000 top in 2000.---All of it's history to get to 700 and Clinton zooms it
VALUES INDEXES-- almost all bad went down--good went up in zoom zoom zoom
FOREIGN AFFAIRS--Peace on Earth good will toward each other---Mark of a true Christian--what has Bush done to Peace on Earth?
POPULARITY---highest poll ratings in history during peacetime in AFRICA, ASIA AND EUROPE . Even 98.5% in Moscow--left office with Highest Gallup rating since it was started in 1920's.
STAND UP FOR JUSTICE--evil conservatives spent $110,000,000 on hearings and investigations and caught one very evil man who took a few plane rides to events.
BOW YOUR HEADS—“Thank you God for sending us a man of Bill Clinton's character, intelligence, knowledge of governance, ability to face up to crises without whimpering and a great leader of the world. Amen”.
THANK YOU GOD FOR THE GOOD TIMES THE CLINTON YEARS.
clarence swinney-political historian-Lifeaholics of America- burlington nc
Author-LIFEAHOLIC--Success by working for a life not just a living
clarenceswinney@bellsouth.net
6-28-03

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

CLINTONOMICS VS REAGANOMICS
Posted by: lifeaholic on Mar 1, 2008 7:09 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Conservatives have spent millions re-inventing Reagan record and -Denigrating Clinton Record

FACH CHECK
1.JOBS—grew by 43% more under Clinton.
2.GDP---grew by 57% more under Clinton.
3.DOW—grew by 700% more under Clinton..
4.NASDAQ-grew by 18 times as much under Clinton.
4.SPENDING--grew by 28% under Clinton---80% under Reagan.
5.DEBT—grew by 43% under Clinton—187% under Reagan.
6. DEFICITS—Clinton got a large surplus--grew by 112% under Reagan.
7.NATIONAL INCOME—grew by100% more under Clinton.
8.PERSONAL INCOME—Grew by 110% more under Clinton.
SOURCES—Bureau of Labor Statistics (www.BLS.Gov)--Economic Policy Institute (EPI.org)—Global & World Almanacs from 1980 to 2003 (annual issues)
www.the-hamster.com (chart taken from NY Times)
National Archives History on Presidents. www.nara.gov
LA Times 10-11-00 on Market--www.Find articles.com

A vote for a Republican is a vote for Less Success.
A vote to reduce the Standard of Living for all Americans.

Clarence Swinney-Political Research Historian-Lifeaholics of America-President
Please submit comments to clarenceswinney@bellsouth.net or P.O. Box 3411-Burlington NC-27216

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: CLINTONOMICS VS REAGANOMICS Posted by: cyrena1987
Short memories
Posted by: robchapman on Mar 1, 2008 7:37 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The 90s were a good time for working people.

I can remember in the mid 90s setting up an interview for my daughter who was then in high school.

After she had been working at the place for three or four weeks, she told me she was unhappy and asked whether it would embarrass me if she started looking for another job.

After three or four weeks she decided that her job wasn't so bad, and hit me with the line, "I thought you said this is a good time to look for a job."

I told her that these are good times, wait until you see bad times.

Now her stock-broker fiance is getting ulcers trying to make money trading bonds. Her friends, her brothers and her friends siblings are all struggling to make ends meet and hold onto or find jobs.

My contemporaries are postponing retirements and/or job searches because of economic insecurity.

For middle class people who work for living the nineties were good.

The Ohio primary, though should not be referendum on the 90s.

Instead voters should look forward to the future and vote for the person who most likely can bring jobs back to the Northeast.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Hillary is the Candidate,NOT Bill
Posted by: freshlemon on Mar 1, 2008 7:40 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
She is the one who is running and she happens to be married to Bill. If the media can remember that, we might be able to hear what she has to say.

In spite of the popular myth of "love and marriage = one person", it just is not true.
Those who perpetuate this myth always think of the man as being the dominant figure. In reality, many men marry to get a meal ticket and a mother. Perhaps one of your writers should do a study on this aspect of relationships in the modern real world.

This writer like many others, refers to 'the Clintons' as if they are the same, and that leads people to believe that Hillary is so tethered to Bill that she can't function as an individual.

Yes, Bill Clinton does support his wife. He like many others thinks that she is the best candidate. Nobody has faulted other spouses for supporting their candidate of choice.

But, oops, I forgot. The other candidates are men, and wives are supposed to support their husbands.

The Bill Clinton years are over. The new president will have to start cleaning up the Bush mess. Cleaning up men's messes is something that women have been doing throughout history.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Environmentalism the key to job growth
Posted by: robchapman on Mar 1, 2008 7:47 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The key to bringing good paying jobs back to America's industrial regions is through environmentalism.

The development of renewable energy, electrical generation systems that take facilities off the grid and solar technology are key in developing jobs for the future. If American industrial plants, homes and commercial facilities can retro-fit to use energy efficiently, it will generate jobs in construction and manufacturing.

The retro-fitting of American facilities will give us a competitive advantage in building and designing facilities world-wide and has the potential to lead a great export boom.

Americans must look forward and think of future opportunities, and prepare to meet them for our benefit.

The bring the old jobs back strategy has failed for decades and offers nothing but grist for political demagoguery.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The decline of blue collar employment
Posted by: robchapman on Mar 1, 2008 8:00 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Blue collar jobs have declined in number and remuneration since the 1950s.

Steel, autos, publishing and other heavy industries have fled the northeast, first to the south, then to the orient and apparently now to south asia.

Part of the dynamic lies in labor costs. But more of the dynamic lies in the changing nature of manufacturing and the obsolesence of American plants and work organization.

Republic Steel closed a massive plant in Buffalo. This plant was closed, not relocated. Plants manufacturing steel on that magnitude have closed in Germany, the UK and Japan.

They have been replaced by far smaller and more efficient plants in Alabama, Korea as well as smaller plants in Germany, the UK, Ireland and the low countries.

The demand for steel that made the mammoth profitiable simply does not exist today and will not return.

In many aspects of manufacturing smaller work-forces can handle greater volumes of work. This is because mechanization- the use of robots- has become so widespread.

In modern industrial plants, the work-force consists of a cadre of highly skilled technicians who take care of the robots and low skilled workers who do jobs that the robots can't. Many of these jobs have to do with inventory control, moving materials around the plants and like tasks.

It is inhumane to demand that industry hire people to paint fenders or to fasten them to car bodies. Robots do this as well as people do and they do not suffer from boredom and the frustration of a dead end job.

In steel, tire making, cars, appliances and all the other blue collar occupations, the masses of workers who made products in the fifties and sixties have been replaced by robots.

If American industry is to be competitive, if American society is to retain any sort of humanity, robots should continue to perform these tasks and people should be freed for other work.

Politicians should not pander to those who argue for the return of this sort of employment. Politicians should provide leadership into green collar employment that will provide us a competitive export edge, remunerative and meaningful work and a healthy environment.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Ms. W--kill the identity politics PLEASE
Posted by: zooeyhall on Mar 1, 2008 8:45 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"No question, Election '08 enlists white men in identity politics for the first time. What will lead them, their skin or their dick?"


Oh boo hoo Ms. W. Please stop playing the tune of gender-ethnic-race blather. I'm going to vote for whoever promises me as a working class male to right the economic wrongs we have suffered since the Reagan years. And I don't care if they are female, black, yellow, or a martian with purple polka dots.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Hillary Receives $35 Million for Campaign In February
Posted by: ronheri on Mar 1, 2008 8:51 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The press release that Hillary's campaign received 35 million last month alone is very telling. The CFR (power-elite, Rockefeller-think tank) along with Rupert Mudoch gave generously to their Queen. So you want Obama? His campaign staff is loaded with the same suspects; plus a foreign policy adviser by the name ofZbigniew Brezinski (Illummaniti top official). McCain? The co-sponser of the Amnesty Bill to allow Citizenship to 20 million illegal aliens and the man who s quoted as admitting he knows little about economics; but believes we will be in endless wars and Iraq for 100 years. What's a voter to do when faced with this trio of choices? I have already voted for Ron Paul. You say he has no chance of winning; well we all lose if he doesn't. The economic Depression we are entering will be very painful all around; so maybe the words of Ron Paul will resonate more clearly in 2012. All this becomes a mute point if as I suspect, the "Decider" declares martial war and totally suspends elections this year. Either way the coming four years will surely be historic.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

OF COURSE EVERYONE did better under Reagan AND BOTH Bushes (especially Dubyah) than Clinton
Posted by: xbj on Mar 1, 2008 10:00 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The longest run of peacetime prosperity in the nation's history... why, a COMPLETE myth, of course. Not to mention the horrific seven year Kosovo war, which pratically, no actually DID start WWIII, invented Islamic terrorism AND caused 9-11, cost us eight trillion dollars, 8000 American lives, over two million women, children, and babies in the Balkans dead, and bankrupted the country. All while Bill was getting hummers from Monica in the Oval Office 24/7. Why George Dubyah Bush, our Lord and Savior, could hardly rebuild the economy with his tax cuts to the wealthy.

JoAnnie... are you just stupid, too young to remember, too ignorant to fact check, or just plain evil?

You might try writing your next article without Rove's tool Obama in your mouth next time (if there IS a next time or next article)... it really seems to cloud your thinking processes, such as they are.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It's not enough we have Rove and Limbaugh revising history; now we have ObamaNation chiming in
Posted by: xbj on Mar 1, 2008 10:03 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Lies. All lies.

Actually, revisionist history such as this coming from ObamaNation PROVES the assertion the Obama is nothing more than a GOP/Rove tool.

And his followers like JoAnnie here only too happy to chime in with their unending bullshit.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Hillary or Obama Versus Armageddon
Posted by: sofla100 on Mar 1, 2008 11:45 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Arguing between Hillary and Obama is soon going to be like arguing about the price of tea in China. One is going to be the Democratic nominee, and it will probably be Obama. Now, regardless of who it is, Democrats have to be united. John McCain has already indicated "NAFTA was a good thing," and he has alluded to troops in Iraq for "100 more years." McCain wants even more tax cuts for the rich, and soon to follow will be more tax breaks for the multinational corporations, oil companies, and for companies shipping jobs overseas. The Republican goal: further the creation of two exclusive societies in America. One is the upper 1% that already owns 1/2 of the countries wealth. And, we all know who the rest are. We will have a choice between America having a chance (Hillary or Obama) and Armageddon. We will have to become united.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

:-)
Posted by: jacksmith on Mar 1, 2008 12:14 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
YOU MIGHT BE AN IDIOT:-)

If you think Barack Obama with little or no experience would be better than Hillary Clinton with 35 years experience.

You Might Be An Idiot!

If you think that Obama with no experience can fix an economy on the verge of collapse better than Hillary Clinton. Whose ;-) husband (Bill Clinton) led the greatest economic expansion, and prosperity in American history.

You Might Be An Idiot!

If you think that Obama with no experience fighting for universal health care can get it for you better than Hillary Clinton. Who anticipated this current health care crisis back in 1993, and fought a pitched battle against overwhelming odds to get universal health care for all the American people.

You Might Be An Idiot!

If you think that Obama with no experience can manage, and get us out of two wars better than Hillary Clinton. Whose ;-) husband (Bill Clinton) went to war only when he was convinced that he absolutely had to. Then completed the mission in record time against a nuclear power. AND DID NOT LOSE THE LIFE OF A SINGLE AMERICAN SOLDIER. NOT ONE!

You Might Be An Idiot!

If you think that Obama with no experience saving the environment is better than Hillary Clinton. Whose ;-) husband (Bill Clinton) left office with the greatest amount of environmental cleanup, and protections in American history.

You Might Be An Idiot!

If you think that Obama with little or no education experience is better than Hillary Clinton. Whose ;-) husband (Bill Clinton) made higher education affordable for every American. And created higher job demand and starting salary's than they had ever been before or since.

You Might Be An Idiot!

If you think that Obama with no experience will be better than Hillary Clinton who spent 8 years at the right hand of President Bill Clinton. Who is already on record as one of the greatest Presidents in American history.

You Might Be An Idiot!

If you think that you can change the way Washington works with pretty speeches from Obama, rather than with the experience, and political expertise of two master politicians ON YOUR SIDE like Hillary and Bill Clinton..

You Might Be An Idiot!

If you think all those Republicans voting for Obama in the Democratic primaries, and caucuses are doing so because they think he is a stronger Democratic candidate than Hillary Clinton. :-)

Best regards

jacksmith...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: -) Posted by: seilnotnilc
» Have A Drink On Me Posted by: seilnotnilc
» Idiot JackSmith: have you noticed? Posted by: BlueBerry PickN
» You might be a Fool... Posted by: AltB
» RE: -) Posted by: vssmith
» DUM Posted by: jmooney
» At least I'm original Posted by: xbj
» Nicely done. and I'm an idiot too Posted by: seilnotnilc
» Appology Accepted Posted by: seilnotnilc
james d granata
Posted by: seilnotnilc on Mar 1, 2008 1:02 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
No one who was there during that period of time could rationally dispute that economically times were great. But presidents do not drive the economy because if they could why wouldn’t they? I mean it's in their best interests for when people are prosperous they pay less attention to government. Look what Bill Clinton got away with in his private life (which probably should have remained private) because of the boom. I give Bill Clinton no credit for a thriving economy any more than I blame Herbert Hoover for the world-wide economic disaster that spawned the depression. The stock market has much more to do with the economy and it has a pattern of fluctuating.

What I think impacts our jobs now is NAFTA which was signed into law by Mr. Clinton and for that he must take responsibility.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Clinton may be better than Bush
Posted by: ReallyBearish on Mar 1, 2008 1:24 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Because it wouldn't take much to be better than Bush. But the Clinton Administration contributed to the economic insanity that we are now dealing with, and it goes beyond NAFTA.

How about the Boskin Commission that gave us "hedonic pricing" and other statistical flim-flam for calculating CPI? The actual CPI (as measured by pre-Clinton calculations) is more like 8 percent. (See shadowgovernmentstatistics.com) The price of commodities and their rise tell us that these stats are a complete lie.

You can't compare past inflation to present inflation if you're aren't measuring the same thing. We owe at least some of this to Bill Clinton

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» I completely disagree. Posted by: xbj
Slimy yellow big mouths
Posted by: mkdelta69 on Mar 1, 2008 3:33 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Obama talks about energizing people to get involved before change can take place.

What do you think Bill Clintons election was? shrub 1 had successful Gulf 1 but had screwed up the economy. Clinton was a vote for change and enough people voted for change to defeat a sitting president. Which doesn't happen much.

Now will the people supporting Obamachange fold like a cheap chair like they did for Clinton. You can only be as successful as your support. But the likes of Hillbilly Heroin Limbaugh, Hannity and O'Riely, beat Clintons Obamachange into the ground.

You want to know why Clinton failed? Not because of his ideas. Because the yellow cowardly BIG MOUTHS OF CHANGE groveled at the Military Industrial Complexes feet, licking their boots. Failing to give him support he needed.

And you will fold again like cheap chairs.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"middle class"?! what about THE REST OF US?
Posted by: BlueBerry PickN on Mar 1, 2008 3:45 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
you know...

those CITIZENS who make up the "POOR CLASS" that nobody gives a DAMN ABOUT??

you know...

...where those MIDDLE CLASS CITIZENS are headed?

what exactly does anybody care about THE NO-SO MIDDLE & 'Lower Class"?
Its so fashionable to ignore the MASSES, right?

...government & candidates ONLY TALK ABOUT THE MIDDLE CLASS PROTECTION.


You're GETTING HOSED & you don't even notice??

~~~
Spread Love...

BlueBerry Pick'n
can be found @
ThisCanadian
~~~
"We, two, form a Multitude" ~ Ovid.
~~~
"Silent Freedom is Freedom Silenced"

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Deregulated
Posted by: BeyondBeliefs on Mar 1, 2008 3:46 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Under Bill Clinton, the deregulated CORPORATIONS became RICH ENOUGH to BUY our ONCE FREE PRESS, to BUY our political system, and to build factories OVERSEAS.

Is that GOOD ?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Your lying, Mr. Wypijewski
Posted by: johnp on Mar 1, 2008 7:29 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Bullshit, Wpyijewski. The upcoming vote in Ohio, won't tell the voters how they feel about Clinton's work on behalf of the working class. What it will tell them, is how successfully they've been manipulated and hustled by bullshitters like yourself, doing hit jobs on Hillary's campaign in advance of the vote. You're merely another part of the Clinton-hating media. You write peieces intended to destroy Sen. Clinton's campaign, but you pretend that you're merely doing objective analyses of her record. In fact, your pieces are negative bullshit, released to the public before anyone has a chance to confirm or deny nearly all of what you say, and since what you say is unflattering, you can hurt Hillary's vote, before the voter has a chance to find out what a scoundrel you are.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: HRC and the sewer Posted by: AltB
Overheard Prayer...
Posted by: marizara on Mar 1, 2008 9:06 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...at child's bedroom door. "Dear God. Please save Mommy and Daddy from the polotik Monster. They are both scared, and so am I. Thank you, I love you."

Now that we have the beloved Internet, and we can find out everything, we can get really, really scared! Is everybody with me??? NOTHING frightens me, and I am really scared. We've all been asleep all these years, and didn't even know it. Hoooo, boy!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Whomever gets in office.....
Posted by: eosrk on Mar 2, 2008 1:01 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...dosen't deliver, I'm running for president, and will offer Americans the ability to fire all of Capitol Hill, and start over from scratch....for the people, damnit!

Rules state that the person must be 35 years of age, and a natural-born American citizen.

Therefore, I'm qualified

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I love the Clintons!
Posted by: Cathyc on Mar 2, 2008 5:05 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Don't you? They're soooooooooooooo Kool man! Whoaaaa!!!

Watching the American Elections is like looking at a CGI version of the Flinstones. Cartoon stuff!

If that's what America is all about, then I'm all for becoming a Martian. LOL!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Role of Clinton's welfare "reform" today
Posted by: Dianka on Mar 2, 2008 5:41 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What remains a taboo subject among conservatives and progressives alike is the impact of the Clinton admin.'s welfare "reform" on all working class Americans. It isn't hard to figure out. These policies have created a massive, involuntary, bottom-wage/no workers' rights or protections workforce. Companies are provided with financial incentives to hire these people, usually on temporary basis. How many family-supporting jobs have been broken down into part-time, bottom wage workfare jobs? It's a system that feeds on itself; workers are laid off, replaced with workfare labor. Some of those laid off are forced to turn to their county "workforce development" (welfare) office, and they will be assigned to replace laid off workers at a fraction of the wages. The newly laid off workers will find themselves at the county workfare office, ready to replace other workers (at a fraction of the wages), and on and on it goes. Clinton's welfare reforms have been horrendous for the poor, and suck more and more people into poverty while increasing corporate profits.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Absolutely!
Posted by: donl51 on Mar 2, 2008 9:44 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
All during his 8 years our business did well,very well,Advertising,producing catalogs mostly wholesalers, mfgs,the like and our share of the retail end,then as if out of nowhere the companies either closed due to heavy pricing differences,literally we watched an era change companies seeking lower prices went overseas,now I'm talking catalogs here ,package design and printing,every part involved w/selling products.it wasn't simply loosing an account,that goes w/the territory its loosing the accnt.forever!! ,nobody on this continent can hope to match these prices,It got worse as Bushco continued on,,I sold my end of the business to go back to being an artist,got cancer,so I'm a semi retired artist ,who feels the conservatives sold us out,but do I think these days the other side will make it all better?...Nope!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Who represent the working class
Posted by: donl51 on Mar 2, 2008 10:45 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I was a ''Professional'' I often worked 15-16 hr.days for the same total of a given job, Granted I made a desent buck,so'd my plumber,he went to 2 years voc,school,I got a BA/MA in art/advertising marketing,yet I worked my ass off,a lot longer than a lot of these ''working class''!from what I remember there were unions for everyone except migrants and they had a deal,I didn't have any deals,no unions either,paid high ass taxes,I never really understood the class system in our country,so who was or is this working class,to me these days its anyone lucky enough to have a job!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]