This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

Guest Post: The Bill Clinton Myth

Tyler Durden's picture


Submitted by James E. Miller of the Ludwig von Mises Institute

The Bill Clinton Myth

Earlier this week, former U.S. president Bill Clinton gave the keynote address to the Democractic National Convention in an effort to lend some of his popularity to Barack Obama.  With the unemployment rate still stubbornly high at 8.1%, Obama has lost many of the enthused voters who put him into the Oval Office in 2008.  Clinton was tapped to deliver the speech not only because of his image of a wonkish pragmatist but because of his presiding over the booming economy of the late 1990s.  Like a prized mule, Clinton was dragged out to give Democrats someone to point to and say that his policies were the hallmark of smart governance.

What attracts the left, both politicians and media, to Slick Willy is the fact that he presided over a thriving economy even while raising taxes.  This coincidence was championed as a justification for higher tax rates by Obama in his own speech before the DNC.

I want to reform the tax code so that it’s simple, fair, and asks the wealthiest households to pay higher taxes on incomes over $250,000 – the same rate we had when Bill Clinton was president; the same rate we had when our economy created nearly 23 million new jobs, the biggest surplus in history, and a lot of millionaires to boot.

The Clinton-era tax hikes, it is alleged, provided the federal government the means to create a healthy middle class.  Or at least that’s the only casual connection that can be gathered from such a philosophy.  The left claims that economic growth is driven primarily by middle class spending.  This spending needs to be subsidized in turn by government initiatives.  As Nobel Prize winning economist and class warrior Joseph Stiglitz puts it:

Many at the bottom, or even in the middle, are not living up to their potential, because the rich, needing few public services and worried that a strong government might redistribute income, use their political influence to cut taxes and curtail government spending. This leads to underinvestment in infrastructure, education, and technology, impeding the engines of growth.

Stiglitz’s thinking rests on the Keynesian theory that economies are reliant on strong levels of consumption and demand.  And with the right people in office, the state is the most capable institution of spending a nation into prosperity.

However this is a misunderstanding of the difference between spending by private individuals and political spending.  Government is incapable of being run like a business.  Enterprise is based off the principle of satisfying voluntary patrons with no guarantee of success.  Even in a hampered market economy where corporations receive special privileges via the state, the consumer remains the kingmaker.  On the other hand, government receives all income through coercive measures.  Profit and loss accounting is of little concern when losses are borne by the taxpayer and profits are immediately devoted to political projects.  Should the public Treasury run low, tax collectors can be sent forth to shakedown the unpresuming citizens.

When it comes to rational economic calculation, public officials need not worry about spending money effectively. To attribute increased revenue being taxed away from the private economy with robust growth misconstrues how wealth is created.  Government doesn’t create wealth; it merely transfers it between parties.  Similarly, it only consumes capital that has already been produced.  Because society existed before the state and because the state functions off of what it pilfers from society, public expenditures do not add to net wealth.  In order for one tax dollar to be spent, it has to be first taken from the pocket of a taxpayer.  Whatever subjective desires could have been achieved by that dollar become overridden to satisfy the whims of the political class.

As journalist of the old right Garet Garrett wrote in his vital essay “The Revolution Was

If you raise agricultural prices to increase the farmer’s income the wage earner has to pay more for food. If you raise wages to increase the wage earner’s income the farmer has to pay more for everything he buys. And if you raise farm prices and wages both it is again as it was before. Nevertheless, to win the adherence which is indispensable you have to promise to increase the income of the farmer without hurting the wage earner and to increase the wage earner’s income without hurting the farmer. The only solution so far has been one of acrobatics.

The money distributed by politicians and bureaucrats is forever stained with previous sin.  The fact that the economy didn’t stagnate under higher taxes during Clinton’s term in office doesn’t demonstrate that taxation has no harmful effects.  Economies aren’t closed experiments where one variable can be introduced and the effects observed.  There are far too many factors at play.  Concrete theories based off certain truths must be applied in such a way to interpret date and wring sense out of it.  Good economic conditions weren’t a result of heightened taxes but instead prevailed in spite of them.  While the productivity gains from the newly widespread use of personal computers and the internet had a positive effect on growth, another factor often goes unmentioned.  The later-half of the 1990s may be looked back upon as golden years but much of the gains experienced by the stock market were not representative of organic growth.  A significant amount of investment came not from natural causes but from monetary manipulation by the Federal Reserve.  See the following chart for the year-over-year percentage of growth of the M2 money supply.

As Pace University professor of economics Joseph Salerno writes:

In 1992 and 1993, the Fed gunned the money supply increasing it at double-digit annual rates in an attempt to propel the economy into a more expeditious recovery.  In 1994, the Fed reversed course and held the monetary growth rate at low levels through 1995.  In 1996 it did another about-face and substantially increased the pace of monetary inflation through 1999.  Just as the Austrian business cycle theory predicted, real private investment soared from a low of 12 percent of GDP in 1991 to an unprecedented high of 20 percent of GDP by mid-2000 with a pause in the tight money years 1994-1995.

…like the stock bubble, the investment bubble was driven by monetary inflation and doomed to collapse whenever Greenspan decided that the economic data were signaling impending price inflation and slammed on the monetary brake.  This occurred last year (2000) when consumer price inflation shot up to nearly 4 percent per year and jolted Greenspan and the FOMC into raising short-term interest rates. Indeed the money supply actually shrunk by $20 billion and its annual rate of growth (year over year) plummeted from an average of 6.23 percent for the period1996-1999 to -1.24 percent in 2000.

This monetary tightening devastated the New Economy and the NASDAQ tanked, falling by over 50 percent from its high in March 2000.  But, even more importantly, it also brought the investment boom in the real sector of the economy to a screeching halt.

Like the decade that preceded the Great Depression, productivity gains which drove consumer prices downward masked the amount of monetary stimulus being pumped into the economy.  When the bubble collapsed, Greenspan once again turned to the printing press to bail himself out.  Instead of causing a bubble in the tech sector, the burst of inflation made its way into the housing sector.  By the time the housing bubble popped, Greenspan left the chairmanship of the Fed to great acclaim.  Milton Friedman writing in the Wall Street Journal declared Greenspan had “set the standard” for Fed chairmen in maintaining stable prices and growth.  In actuality, he and his colleagues of the Federal Open Market Committee were responsible for the continuation of the boom-bust cycle and current Great Recession.

Today, Clinton still takes credit for Greenspan’s manipulated boom.  His supporters on the left love nothing more than to point at his presidency as vindication of the backwards theory that higher taxes equal more growth.  Clinton wasn’t a policy wonk; he was a politician who dipped into the Social Security trust fund to give an appearance of balancing the budget while the national debt still climbed higher.

Through all of his financial scandals, womanizing, aggressive foreign policy approaches, and possible cover ups, it is actually fitting that Clinton is still looked to by the political establishment as someone worthy of respect.  He is representative of F.A. Hayek’s timeless lesson: in government the worst rise to the top and state power corrupts.


- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Sun, 09/09/2012 - 09:46 | 2775973 bank guy in Brussels
bank guy in Brussels's picture

Let's not forget how Bill Clinton in 1992, put to death a mentally impaired black man, so he could get elected with a 'tough on crime' theme

Ricky Rector did not even realise he was being put to death ... he told the executioners he was saving his pecan pie dessert of his last meal in this world, for 'after my lethal injection', ordered by then-Governor of Arkansas Clinton

There was a BBC documentary done, 'The Killer and the Candidate' ... seems to be 'erased' now ...

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 09:48 | 2775983 Ayn NY
Ayn NY's picture

Ted Bundy made me pro death penalty, Ricky Rector was the case that still makes me question the policy.

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 09:54 | 2775989 Almost Solvent
Almost Solvent's picture

I did not have sexual relations with that woman. I just got my rocks off down her throat, then that whore spit it out on her blue dress.

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 10:51 | 2776054 Bananamerican
Bananamerican's picture

so what? who cares? Bill got blown

To reiterate, when you partisan righties reach for ammo from incidents like this, it makes you seem desperate, Machiavellian AND there's nothing else to fault the man with....

go back to your george w bush commemorative gatefolds....

"and leave the grownups in peace!" (that's my favorite neocon quip....That, and the one about "the hate")

You want some ammo spinster britches?

The Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act (GLB), also known as the Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999, (Pub.L. 106-102, 113 Stat. 1338, enacted November 12, 1999) is an act of the 106th United States Congress (1999–2001). It repealed part of the Glass–Steagall Act of 1933, removing barriers in the market among banking companies, securities companies and insurance companies that prohibited any one institution from acting as any combination of an investment bank, a commercial bank, and aninsurance company. With the passage of the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act, commercial banks, investment banks, securities firms, and insurance companies were allowed to consolidate. The legislation was signed into law by President Bill Clinton.


But you know this already.....

You SHOULD know this already.

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 12:04 | 2776167 Manthong
Manthong's picture

And don’t forget that Clinton inflicted the Commodities and Futures Modernization Act of 2000 upon us which overturned bucket shop prohibitions and enabled the $700 Trillion derivatives overhang that is  accelerating the destruction of the world’s economy.

.. the icing on the 8 year evil Clinton cake.

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 12:52 | 2776273 RichardP
RichardP's picture

Damn them Republicans.  Oh, wait ...

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 13:25 | 2776327 Michael
Michael's picture

Clinton signed NAFTA.

Clinton abolished Glass-Steagall.

Clinton changed the formula they use to calculate the unemployment rate they announce on Jewtube MSM TV so the percentage appears lower.

And he was responsible for the DOT-COM/NASDAQ bubble and bust covered up by 9/11 that nobody talks about!

How much money did that fuck head Clinton lose people there?

Clinton's contribution to the CRA abortion.  He's more responsible for the housing crash then all other presidents put together, yet I'm watching on TV saying yesterday's policies didn't work?  Hypocrisy, thy name is Bill.

And the sick twisted people love him for it.

The Clinton/Obama ass licking Democrat/Math Challenged persons, deserve what they get.

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 13:39 | 2776337 TruthInSunshine
TruthInSunshine's picture

Ah yes, Bill Clinton, the Savior of the Middle Class, who signed NAFTA into law on Dec 8, 1993, along with bestowing Most Favored Nation Trade Status on China on May 28, 1993 (both of which Papa Bush- ex-CIA head and "new world order" afficianado, tee'd up for Billy), two of the modern legislative acts that decimated the American Middle Class in more and deeper ways that we have only begun to see.

All the world 'tis a stage...make that a comedy.

As former, actually competent, well-trained, well-paid and knowledgeable American wage earners now know, it's hard for even them to compete against foreign workers (in full-tilt Socialist/Communist nations) that make 1/40th (now, maybe 1/20th) what they used to. Even if it takes 10 of these foreign workers to be as productive as one of them, the math favors the foreign workers, especially when it's a pre-condition of selling multinational services/goods in those same foreign markets.

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 13:44 | 2776357 strannick
strannick's picture

Sounds like some miffed folks still are still routing for particular factions in the Dempublican Party

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 14:21 | 2776379 Bananamerican
Bananamerican's picture

That's "rooting"....

and I'm guessing that "reading for comprehension" was not one of your strong suits in grade school.

My avatar shows W and O as Alfred E. Newman. Buy yourself a clue and see if you can figure out my own political stance.

As of this posting, you seem to have 15 RomneyTron2012™ voters for company (hey, I can make half-assed assumptions too!), no doubt furiously scouting the boards, at this moment, for MDB posts to red arrow (lol)

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 14:26 | 2776446 fourchan
fourchan's picture

Bill Clinton was given the presidency due to his silence to bush senior over the Iran contra drug smuggling affair in bill Clintons Mena Arkansas.

In retrospect you can see how we the people are given presidents by those few in power, the trappings of voting mean exactly nothing. The cogs like the cia's agent seifert aka oliver north, or barry seal or dan lassitor just keep turning.

This republic has been lost, bought and sold to slave masters and greedy pricks who benefit from blind ignorance, I give thanks zh is here to point out the reality of the situations in this lost cause of a state. 

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 17:06 | 2776754 vato poco
vato poco's picture

Golly, Banana! You hardcore, kneejerk, mind-numbed, koolaid-drinkin' lefty robots **really** don't like ANY criticism of your Dear Leaders, do ya. That 'reading not your strong suit' zinger WAS super original, though! And....BTW....your political stance is that of a child. "Close your eyes and wish and hope real _real_ hard, and maybe the Dear Leader will grant us our prayers!" Sadly, you have lots & lots of company, doncha. Legions of dumbshits, all of you mindlessly mouthing the slogans the profs made you memorize in skuel, mindlessly defending your moronic ideology and blindly attacking the Unbelievers and Heretics just like the profs instructed you to, still blissfully unaware that Santa isn't real.


Sun, 09/09/2012 - 21:51 | 2777127 TruthInSunshine
TruthInSunshine's picture

Please, for the love of all that is decent, stop perpetuating the myth that there's a millimeter of difference between Republicans & Democrats on the very big issues (aka non-social wedge issues), or that Republicans & Democrats are annointed and work for the very same interests (i.e. NOT the American Citizenry). You're only aiding & abetting the Deep Capture crowd.


The false left-right paradigm has been a large element in the rot that has attacked the foundation of any notion that The United States is remotely close to anything genuinely resembling a Republican Form of a Constitutional Democracy.*


* In a Republic, the sovereignty resides with the people themselves.  In a Republic, one may act on his own or through his representatives when he chooses to solve a problem.  The people have no obligation to the government; instead, the government is a servant of the people, and obliged to its owner, "We the People."  Many politicians have lost sight of that fact. 

A Constitutional Republic has some similarities to democracy in that it uses democratic processes to elect representatives and pass new laws, etcThe critical difference lies in the fact that a Constitutional Republic has a Constitution that limits the powers of the government.  It also spells out how the government is structured, creating checks on its power and balancing power between the different branches.




Sun, 09/09/2012 - 14:39 | 2776484 Urban Redneck
Urban Redneck's picture

No dissection of Bubbanomics is complete without exposing the MYTH that he (or the Gingrich minions) balanced the budget.  The BUDGET GAP (albeit reduced) created by the White House and Congress was closed by the Satanic Triumvirate of Alan ZIRPspan, RubenShylock, and Fat Larry.  They took the public balance sheet and traded the thirty year fixed for a 5-year ARM, et voila- budget is balanced by virtue of an accounting gimmick, a reduction in `interest expense`.

A few years (one artificially created boom-bust cycle) later Bushy implores the public to do their their patriotic duty to support the CHINESE economy by mortgaging their houses and future to go out and buy more iShit from overseas.

Rinse, Repeat.

Or go back to the Roaring Twenties, and the early days of the Fed.  Interest-only ARMs had a simpler name, but functioned much the same, at least for the TBTFs that evicted the uppity Serfs, while the smaller banks failed left and right.  The NASDAQ didn’t exist, but if you flip through the newspaper advertisements the shocking similarity of the NYSE mania is self evident.

The fact that Keynesianism is not regarded as pure insanity is a testament to the failure of basic financial literacy and history in a dumbed down citizenry.

However, in response to the common cry of a pox on both your houses, and the ensuing childish self imposed time out in the corner, I recommend rereading Petrarch, acceptance of man’s in-consequence and inability to influence either The Man or Nature is downright medieval thinking and has been discredited for centuries longer than Keynes.

Then there is that whole CFMA thing...

Banking is nothing more then spread arithmatic, yet both the public and politicians are continually as stupified by it as a mark at a three card monte game. - IT’S THE INTEREST RATES, STUPID...

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 14:39 | 2776485 Larry Dallas
Larry Dallas's picture

Clinton was also the first to dip into defined contribution retirement plans by establishing the Roth IRA.

Slick move: pay taxes on conversion today with the - promise - that you would never pay taxes withdrawals when your retire. That move alone contributed to the budget surplus but the boomers and similarly aged sheeple will likely find out that they were lied to again.

With $14 Trillion in retirement assets, tell me the government hasn't been licking it's chops.

H/t Robert Rubin...

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 15:24 | 2776597 Michael
Michael's picture

Don't get me started on what Clinton did to our friends the Serbians.

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 21:22 | 2777191 Clashfan
Clashfan's picture

He may have signed it, but Bush 41 brought it.

Partisanship is silly.

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 13:24 | 2776328 johnQpublic
johnQpublic's picture

75 million tax payer dollars to prove bill got his knob slobbed

75 million

which of these partisan assholes is responsible for paying that money back?

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 13:47 | 2776354 Michael
Michael's picture

Citizens United SCOTUS verdict did not make corporations people, otherwise they would be paying the AMT alternative minimum tax.

Hillary the Movie Trailer

Hillary Movie.avi

Can someone please upload the Citizens United documentary "Hillary: The Movie" on Youtube so we call all easily watch it and so our owners can't scrub it from the interlink?

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 20:25 | 2777093 roadhazard
roadhazard's picture

The right wing helped take Americans mind off of the fact that they were getting screwed by Repubicans and democraps while they all watched the blow job show. Typical misdirection. A POX on both Houses.

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 21:24 | 2777196 Clashfan
Clashfan's picture

It really served to help distract from bigger issues like Whitewater. See Arkansas Development Finance Authority. See Mena. See Bush. Oh, wait....

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 16:37 | 2776711 LMAOLORI
LMAOLORI's picture



Yea it's clearly all their fault (sarc) just like social security that clinton dipped into and obama threatened to withhold from the old people just a few months ago.  Here he is campaigning and lying again.

SEMINOLE, Fla.—Campaigning in a state that has long drawn retirees, President Barack Obama on Saturday promised to fight the privatization of Medicare and Social Security, the popular health and retirement programs for seniors.

In making the vow, Mr. Obama appeared to be implying that his Republican rival, Mitt Romney, supports Social Security privatization, which he doesn't.

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 11:50 | 2776170 LongBallsShortBrains
LongBallsShortBrains's picture

Billy didn't lose a lot of peoples respect for getting blown. Billy could have answered that it was none of anybody's business but his own. Instead he CHOSE to lie about something that he did not even have to address.
That's the thing with people who casually lie without regard to consequence. They get away with lies until they are caught. Then their credibility suffers.

Billy was So sure that he wouldn't get found out, that instead he lied when he didn't have to.

I say good for Bill, he got a hummer. Bill the liar that is.

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 13:01 | 2776290 RichardP
RichardP's picture

As stated in the the commentary surrounding the impeachment process - the conventional wisdom on Capitol Hill was/is that oral sex is not considered "sexual intercourse" or "sexual relations".  For the last number of years, the kids in high school think the same way, but they also put anal sex on the list of things that are not "sexual intercourse".

In the context of word definitioins used on Capitol Hill, Clinton did not lie when he said he did not have sexual relations with that woman.  All the politicians listening knew exactly what he meant.  Unfortunately, the listening public generally was not aware of the politician's meaning of that phrase.  That was Clinton's mistake, and I agree that he should have just said it was nobody's business.

On the other hand - don't gentlemen usually lie about such things in order to protect their ladies reputations?

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 14:28 | 2776457 A Nanny Moose
A Nanny Moose's picture

For the last number of years, the kids in high school think the same way, but they also put anal sex on the list of things that are not "sexual intercourse".

Sodomy, when practiced on taxpayers is not intercourse either, I suppose.

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 16:19 | 2776689 Urban Redneck
Urban Redneck's picture


WHEREAS dumb kids might not know this.  All Parties the impeachment proceedings agree that this IS, and has been, an explicitely documented element of both US and Common Law for CENTURIES. 

The sideshow would never have happened if the public didnßt keep electing a Lawyer-in-Chief and the CongressCrittersUnion of the ABA. 

What`s shocking is that NOT ONE of the countless lawyers involved defined SEXUAL RELATIONS ...makes you wonder if they were all looking for a legal clusterfuck conclusion from the outset...

You can argue about the usage or definition of IS, but SODOMY and SEXUAL INTERCOURSE have very different defintions legally.

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 16:35 | 2776708 JR
JR's picture

Bill Clinton is not morally qualified to be President of the United States. You can make definitions and you can buy out Congressmen and buy out the media, but you cannot buy out the foundation of this great country and trample through the sewer and say: You know what? It was legal!

You know what? There are people who say times change. But some things do not change and this is one of them. And for the people who think this has changed, they are mistaken. And they are making a serious mistake that the people and the country and its children are paying for.

If Andrew Jackson were here, he would shoot Clinton full of holes. And that is a standard that should never have been changed


Sun, 09/09/2012 - 16:42 | 2776717 nmewn
nmewn's picture

lol...thats weird, I always defined sexual relations as one where there is risk of getting a sexually transmitted disease.

Friggin lawyers, ya gotta love em.

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 17:33 | 2776800's picture

Damned dictionaries.


sexual relations

noun pl Definition of SEXUAL RELATIONS : coitus

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 18:11 | 2776850 nmewn
nmewn's picture


Well, I wonder what all the hubbub was about that there Kama Sutra then ;-)

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 13:22 | 2776325 goldfish1
goldfish1's picture

good for Bill, he got a hummer ?????

yeah, that worked out real well. who knows how Bill and SHrill the liars may have been compromised, making deals for Israel and China, as the Lewinsky and other threats hung over their heads.

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 16:21 | 2776579 JR
JR's picture

Bill Clinton was impeached, not for lying, but for getting caught in an act that repels most Americans, caught because of factual revelations concerning Monica Lewinsky; he only lied to try and save what little reputation he had left. Those who do not agree should just contemplate what would have happened to Clinton’s position if had explained on the stand, truthfully, what he did with Monica Lewinsky in the Oval Office. We all know what would have happened, of course; that would have been even too much for Republican Henry Hyde.

Clinton was impeached and he would have been removed from office if it hadn’t been for the complicit Republican leadership completely in the pockets of the ruling bankers.  Removal of a president would upset substantially the status quo and derail many of the bought-and-paid-for contracts bankers have with the Congress.

Bill Clinton is a fitting image for Time Magazine Man of the Year and for you as one of its readers, and for the Democrat Party as its keynote speaker.

Molestation, sodomy and copulation, lewd and lascivious acts with a young girl – I’m surprised a man, let alone a president, got away with it even in modern-day America. In some "more primitive" societies a man engaged in such lewd acts would have been killed.




Sun, 09/09/2012 - 17:20 | 2776780 vato poco
vato poco's picture

No, JR, sorry to spoil your pretty little narrative, but all that above is just total bullshit. So "Bill lied to protct his rep", did he? How sweet. Unfortunately, he did it while *under oath*. You know: perjury. That crime Bill's Justice (LOL) Department put hundreds of people in prison for. See, lying under oath is a *crime* - and Bubba, as a lawyer, knew that. As a lawyer, he also knew that he DIDN'T HAVE TO ANSWER THE QUESTION. But Bubba was always sure he was the smartest guy in the room, and - being a sociopath - lying was much more fun & interesting, anyway.

He refuses to answer the question - takes the 5th - he takes some heat, sure. But eventually it all goes away, because - since there would have been no answer to fry him with - his tormentors would have had to slink away, emptyhanded. Bubba - like the current jackoff in the WH - overestimates his IQ by a large %. Telling that lie was easily the secons stupidest thing he did while prez. Right after 'giving nuclear reactors to North Korea', because they 'promised they wouldn't use them to make weapons'. Lastly, Lewisnky wasn't a "young girl". She was a 22/23 year old _woman_ at the time in question. Fair game in any society in the world, except of course the stoneage islamic "societies". Now, **JFK** screwed underage interns (Fiddle and Faddle).....but it's considered unseemly to point that out.

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 18:08 | 2776844 JR
JR's picture

The bottom line is Clinton was impeached by the House for his sexual encounters in the Oval Office with a White House intern.

Clinton’s extra-marital affair and the resulting investigation is what led to Clinton’s impeachment by the House of Representative. Your “ha-ha” technicalities are obscuring your vision. The bottom line is that Clinton’s sexual acts in the Oval Office got him impeached by the House.

Al Capone went to prison on a technicality, for income tax evasion, but that was the lesser of his crimes; the real reason the government wanted him behind bars was for murder, for racketeering, for bootlegging… for which he was above the law.

Clinton stayed in office because of a technicality, and because Congressmen, both Democrat and Republican, refused to tell the people exactly what he did and what it meant for our country. If they had done that, then a number of Democrats, especially in the Senate, would not have been able to vote Not Guilty on a technicality regarding the Articles of Impeachment.

Like Capone, Clinton stayed in office because he was let off for his real crimes on the dismissed technicalities of perjury and obstruction of justice (or as you put it on the word “is”); if the Republicans had done their job properly he would have been gone.


Sun, 09/09/2012 - 12:14 | 2776217 hivekiller
hivekiller's picture

Bill wasn't the only one getting blown. He blew up the Murrah building to get rid of the Whitewater investigation and get re-elected. It was "for the children".

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 14:47 | 2776513 Manthong
Manthong's picture

Hey, which one of you financial guru and history buffs knows how Hillary figured out how to turn that $1K into $100K in cattle futures?

I need to employ that same brilliant strategy this week.

I don't want to be greedy, I'd  be happy with just a couple $100 or $200 postitions that would close out at $10,000 or $20,000.

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 12:51 | 2776271 goldfish1
goldfish1's picture

With the unemployment rate still stubbornly high at 8.1%

Bwahahaaaahha. Who's writing this pap?

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 13:05 | 2776298 Ima anal sphincter
Ima anal sphincter's picture

+1   That did kinda stand out there while reading the article.

I'm not worried about Billy-Boy. The Medusa, now that is a whole different (and much worse) deal.

One of the biggest sellout traitors who is responsible for SO many lives lost, wants it ALL.

Watch out for that bitch come 2016 (if we actually make it that far).

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 13:07 | 2776302 Ricky Bobby
Ricky Bobby's picture

"when you partisan righties"  nana nana nan nah - WTF. Check the Repugnant - Dumbocrat dialectic at the door when you enter fight club dude. In addition you will get an extra beating for your prose as quoted above.

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 13:54 | 2776366 Bananamerican
Bananamerican's picture

hey NASCAR dumbshit, i pee on both you AND your Lib dopplegangers with equal disgust.

You Rightists give yourselves away when you mention "The Blowjob" (™ FoxNews)...

Now go shove a Pirelli up your ass

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 15:16 | 2776584 Clowns on Acid
Clowns on Acid's picture

bananna loser....

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 16:59 | 2776747 GeezerGeek
GeezerGeek's picture

It must be hard thinking with a banana between one'e ears rather than having a brain. He tries dissing NASCAR fans and then makes reference to Pirelli tires. How clueless to try tying NASCAR and Pirelli together. NASCAR uses Goodyear tires (Sprint Cup, at least) whereas Pirelli is the tire used by Formula 1. Not knowing that renders the banana man unreliable in all other arenas.

I'm so TIRED of these know-nothings.

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 20:11 | 2777067 Bananamerican
Bananamerican's picture

Not Pirelli?
I stand humbled in the presence of your useless fucking knowledge

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 19:42 | 2777018 BigJim
BigJim's picture

 You Rightists give yourselves away when you mention "The Blowjob" (™ FoxNews)...

Now go shove a Pirelli up your ass

BanalAmerican, have you met LTER? I think you'd get on famously... almost like twins, in fact.

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 16:19 | 2776687 boogerbently
boogerbently's picture

He started the "sub-prime" lending, spent the defense budget during a rare "non-war" time, spent the surplus Soc. Sec. $$$, and all the "jobs he created" were in the govt......which are bankrupting us now.

He really IS the poster child for liberal fiscal policy.

Now if only the libs would realize how damaging that is.

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 17:02 | 2776749 GeezerGeek
GeezerGeek's picture

On the plus side, he did bomb the Chinese, I thnk. Or at least a Chinese embassy.

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 18:34 | 2776890 malek
malek's picture

 so what? who cares? Bill got blown

I pretty much agree.
And even worse many people don't realize the process trying to him impeached, backfired big time not just in the face of a few dumb GOP members but of all people, as now even the dumbest learned:
As a politician or C-level executive you can do what you want, just don't lie about it on the record and instead claim confusion or "I cannot recall".

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 09:57 | 2775990 Stackers
Stackers's picture

Life of crime, drugs and murder of Bill Clinton is well documented in the movie The Clinton Chronicles

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 10:12 | 2776010 DaveyJones
DaveyJones's picture

Bill's first myth started when he got married

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 10:20 | 2776022 Pladizow
Sun, 09/09/2012 - 11:40 | 2776104 Yes We Can. But...
Yes We Can. But Lets Not.'s picture

I am pretty sure that Frank Davis is not just Obooba's 'father figure', but is in fact his father.  Barack Obama of course did not, as an infant, opt for the African grad student as his supposed father (the boy's maternal grandparents probably recognized that it might be advantageous for the mixed-race child to be known as the son of a Harvard educated man rather than a local drug dealing, philandering, commie-sympathizing pornographer) but he has, as an adult, opted to not set the record straight and to thus propagate the fiction.  But then, there is almost nothing straight about the guy. 

He is, as recently noted by Clint Eastwood, the greatest hoax ever perpetrated upon the American people:

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 12:09 | 2776210 DaveyJones
DaveyJones's picture

I thought he was immaculately conceived... in a lab in Monsanto

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 17:04 | 2776752 GeezerGeek
GeezerGeek's picture

Are you saying he really is a natural-born citizen and can legitimately be president of the US? Darn!

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 10:21 | 2776023 Sofa King
Sofa King's picture

Oh, come on...Bill and Hillary had so much in common.  First and foremost, they're both Proverbial Cocksuckers that are all about the Pussy.


Sun, 09/09/2012 - 14:33 | 2776471 Pure Evil
Pure Evil's picture

I think you meant "Proverbial Splitlickers".

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 11:14 | 2776096 bigbwana
bigbwana's picture

Indeed. This was an arranged marriage. As are all marriages of the Illuminati. And once you're in, the only way out is involuntary death. The Illuminati owned this world. Owned being the operative word. All evil will face justice within months. Months!

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 19:44 | 2777026 BigJim
BigJim's picture

Months, I tell you! Months!

Repetition... it's just soooo convincing.

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 11:08 | 2776088 Buckaroo Banzai
Buckaroo Banzai's picture

AKA "arkancide"

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 10:07 | 2776004 BigInJapan
BigInJapan's picture

It was A&E's Investigative Reports with Bill Curtis:





Sun, 09/09/2012 - 09:45 | 2775976 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

Better post an article titled the W myth or better yet, the Reagan Myth or it will be safe to say that ZH is no longer eschewing the 2 party system and is now firmly in one of the camps....

Did NewsCorp make an offer to buy the site?

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 09:48 | 2775982 dlmaniac
dlmaniac's picture

I know. Truth hurts.

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 12:08 | 2776206 Manthong
Manthong's picture

We'll do the Reagan Myth one when they recognize white as a color at the DNC.

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 13:29 | 2776333 johnQpublic
johnQpublic's picture

the more i look into past presidents, the harder it is for me to find one who was a good president

Ike maybe was decent

but after ike there certainly has been a bunch of shitstains

reagan included

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 17:51 | 2776819 11b40
11b40's picture

While I agree with you on the greatness of Ike, a truly "decent" man, his mistress would have disqualified him form the moralistic perspective of the Clinton haters out today.  Kennedy & Johnson, too.  And then, old Tricky Dick had his own set of problems....just not sexual, but my guess is he had both an election problem and an erection problem.  Reagun was a GE shill for 30 years before being elected prez.  He gave us the whole Government is the enemy rant, and the Republicans have been using it since as an excuse to justify their awful track record at actually governing.  Bush 1 was a huge disappointment...willing to abandon his well know traditional beliefs to cater to the so-called religious rightwingers so he could be elected.  He was the ultimate 'company man' with his deep CIA roots, and his long ties with the Saudi's and other ME oil sheilks.

Clinton's problems have been well laid out here, many of which are fiction.  One thing for sure, he was our most investigated president, and the only thing that stuck was a stain on a dress.  All the rest made for interesting reading and by repitition became part of the legend....either that, or Ken Starr was the most incompetent Independent Prosecutor in history.  Wow, all those crimes Billary committed, and nothing in the end but a blow job.  All those Congressional hearings and investitgations.  All that purient, 7th grade adolescent prose from the leaders of America.  And the hatred is deep, because he beat them at every turn.  Small men...Dick Army, Tom Delay, Newt Gingrich, Phil Gramm and a long list of political hacks acting like children, and not a statesman in the bunch.

Then comes Bush 2.  History will be the judge, but surely the worst president of modern hsitory.

Now, we have to pick between these current 2 wannabe's as the country stares into the abyss.  It's lights out for America.

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 10:28 | 2776027's picture

Let me understand this. When Bill Clinton makes a major public appearance one should not present an analysis based on his words and deeds but should rather make a long list of every bad Republican that ever prowled the streets of Washington. Is that it?

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 11:44 | 2776151 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

Look up the definition of non sequitur and try to square your post with that....

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 11:51 | 2776168's picture

But you did say that an article about Clinton's errors was skewed toward the right because there is no companion piece which lists Reagan and Bush's errors as well. I didn't imagine it.

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 12:08 | 2776209 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

Any article attacking Clintons record that has zero mention of the role of Phil Gramm in the outcome is a hack partisan piece, and bless the Hedge for all its virtues, they are not nearly enough pieces like this pointing out the record of past Republicans..... 

Anyway, today is too nice a day to bandy words with a liar and shill of your ilk....

Ta Ta....

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 12:26 | 2776232 Bay of Pigs
Bay of Pigs's picture

Are you really this fucking stupid? You think ZH supports or defends corrupt assholes like Phil Gramm?

LMAO...come on Tyler, Flak says you're a closet Rupublican sympathizer.


Sun, 09/09/2012 - 13:57 | 2776376 Michael
Michael's picture

If you wish to bask in your left/right paradigm, watch Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert comedy back to back.

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 10:35 | 2776034 Tyler Durden
Tyler Durden's picture

Zero Hedge enjoys debunking all popular and populist most myths. As for whose candidate Mitt Romney is, we are fairly confident that it is no secret to most readers, as we have covered that particular topic on numerous occasions in the past (hint: type in Mitt Romney in the search function). But just in case there is confusion for those with selective amnesia, here it is again.

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 10:56 | 2776064 holdbuysell
holdbuysell's picture

That list looks a lot like Obama's...

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 13:19 | 2776319 Dr Hackenbush
Dr Hackenbush's picture


Paymasters always hedge between top candidates (or warring countries).  BO had 2012 donor list scrubbed for our naked eye. Seems the banks have chosen the 'invisible put' strategy - as massive unpopularity being the ultimate nod to the contrary. 


Sun, 09/09/2012 - 14:08 | 2776401 hidingfromhelis
hidingfromhelis's picture

The above list looks a lot like Obama's 2008 top contributors; the 2012 list is oddly different.  Guess politicians like to be paid up front for future performance.  Change?  Not counting on it.

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 15:37 | 2776623 Tyler Durden
Mon, 09/10/2012 - 11:43 | 2778584 DaveyJones
DaveyJones's picture

cleared for landing by SCOTUS - The Last Branch Falls

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 23:42 | 2777522 ciao
ciao's picture

Look at the raw numbers.  Obama has accumulated more than Romney.  3 of his top ten are banks.  3 of the remainder are eductional interests whose use of cahs is directed by boards dominated by bankers. You take money from Harvard and you are taking money from Wall Street bankers

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 10:45 | 2776042 greyghost
greyghost's picture

 AA FLAK....exactly, i have notice a leaning towards the republican side lately on the hedge front. the baininite wizard and his muppet have very serious problems within their own base of support. with their voucher program for medicare [read this to are a couple dimes...go out and buy health insurance at the age of sixty five??] , even the younger kids can see what the premiums would go to under that system! the block poll and dog park poll says that people are seeing a last ditch effort by the old guard republicans to maintain control of the party. the baininite wizard is the prime example of their business model and their business model for the u.s. anyone needing to see an example of this business model needs to read Matt Taibbi's article "greed and debt: the true story of mitt romney and bain capital". while reading it i was struck by how bain capital works and what has happened with the gutting of manufacturing jobs in the United States these past forty or more years. now that the repubilcan convention is over, the few die hard hold outs have had their faith tested to the core. even they were shocked by the level of nazi/communist control romney's boys went to. yet, they went to such measures as to not even announce the other votes cast for any one but romney. romney's vote were spoken, no one else's name was spoken...telling...yes? EVEN AFTER THE NOMINATION WAS ALL LOCKED IN FOR ROMNEY.....THEY GO AND PULL A STUNT LIKE THAT? REALLY? HELL THEY DON"T EVEN TRY TO HIDE UNDER THE CLOAK OF THE FLAG ANYMORE!!!!!!

guns or butter

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 10:50 | 2776059 Keegan11
Keegan11's picture

How's that koolaid tasting?

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 13:11 | 2776133 greyghost
greyghost's picture

koolaid? i watched it transfold before my very eyes, in living color no less. lets not even get into the floor fight over changing the convention rules weaking the power of the states to control their delegates in future conventions. every republican knows that any republican running for office "needs every single republican vote" to get elected.  yet these two idiots piss off at least half the republicans at the convention with just these two stunts. god i wanted to be a fly on the wall to see "what was going on behind the know behind closed doors"! where should i send your american flag so you may wrap yourself in it, so as to stay warm and fuzzy. oh what the hell, you should know that i couldn't stand koolaid as a kid, just colored water with lots and lots of sugar.

Mon, 09/10/2012 - 00:18 | 2777576 Bananamerican
Bananamerican's picture

why bother greyghost...

It's not your imagination...

There are partisans among us and they run about 3 (4?) to 1, Righties to Lefties on ZH

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 10:42 | 2776046 Keegan11
Keegan11's picture

Quit your whining and -- well, go F yourself if the truth hurts

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 11:13 | 2776095 ISEEIT
ISEEIT's picture

Fuck off troll. The lesser of two evils is still evil.

Eat shit.

Think the 'left shit' taste better than the 'right shit'?

Enjoy your favorite shit then.

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 11:41 | 2776140 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

You have demonstrated your narrowmindedness in spades...

Keep up with the non sequiturs....

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 12:27 | 2776228 greyghost
greyghost's picture

lol.....flak, your choice of words just cracks me at times. we may not agree on all things. however, i do admire a person who can spin an excellant word or two...salute.

p.s. just went back and reread the thread on this post and there you go again, using those words twice....cracks me i tell you, and yes i did have to look it

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 12:13 | 2776213 greyghost
greyghost's picture

guns or butter, guns or butter, guns or butter? what will the american people choose? the baininite business model and the last final gutting of the once great nation of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. inquiring minds want to know. have just got to laugh about how i saw bill o'reilly trying to choke out the words about how great the two twins of stupidity were doing. you know what with them taking a hard earned rest from the campaign trail last week.  i actually watched a fox news show about one of the latest polls. they actually went into some sort of contorted poll to the poll to a sub poll to the main poll to get a positive view to the baininite twins. question: in the odds making in vegas, during the run up to the vice presidential pick how many insiders knew that the great paul ryan's brother worked for mittens at bain? oh to go back and watch how the odds were made and how they changed along the way. can anyone spell shoe in? can anyone spell crony capitalism in all it's glory? now i know why all the key buzz words have been used  against o'bama. how many times have i heard "crony capitalism" and o'bama used in the same sentence over the past year. interesting...very interesting.  as the republicans repeat everyday, this election will change the face of america. guns or butter? guns or soc. sec.? guns or medicare? everyone knows which one the baininite twins will choose....yes

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 12:19 | 2776227 Bay of Pigs
Bay of Pigs's picture

The bold font doesnt help your poorly written diatribe, although you are getting closer on Mittzle Romneystein and Co. 


Sun, 09/09/2012 - 13:07 | 2776297 greyghost
greyghost's picture

sorry about the bold font must have hit it by accident...never have used any of those buttons. i am just trying to throw as many different things on the table to chew on as possible. as i have said before, i detest o'bama, but i fear romney. the republicans don't like soc. sec.,how many voters are on soc. sec.? they don't like medicare, how many voters are on medicare? they don't like teachers or unions or welfare or food stamps or unemployment benefits? one just has to step back and wonder just who is left that they like? in all my years i have never seen two people running for office that don't like more than half the voters...ever! i live in a very republican city, that has never elected a democrat, ever, not even for dog catcher. i am a life long republican and my neighbors and i have very serious doubts about the baininite twins. block poll and wifes dog park poll...just saying. watch closely with 60 days to go, i smell panic in the republican party, what with the daily mailings requesting money or nonsense polls with questions that have their answers already preordained. i am watching the fox boys closely. they now have their pollsters telling viewers to disregard this or that poll that doesn't agree with the story line. their pollsters just used to comment on the polls and try to spin this way or that...not anymore....just throw that poll out! i believe we will be seeing more and more of this.

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 14:19 | 2776430 Bay of Pigs
Bay of Pigs's picture

My friend, you missed the point entirely. The election has already been decided, and probably years ago at that. What are you failing to grasp here? It just doesn't fucking matter.

Step out of the false paradigm. 

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 17:08 | 2776761 greyghost
greyghost's picture

tell that simple minded answer to the person on soc. sec.! hey, it doesn't matter? tell the person on medicare! it doesn't matter? tell that to person on food stamps! what the hey, it doesn't matter? the point i haven't missed entirely!!!!!!! is that we are talking about real live human beings!!!!!!!!

never, during all the years as a republican have i ever forgotton that we are always talking about real live people during the debates about welfare, soc. sec. etc. people with far less than i and my family. might i suggest that you step away from your computor and really look at what you wrote. you might discover a person you do not wish to know. good day


Sun, 09/09/2012 - 19:53 | 2777040 BigJim
BigJim's picture


This is very, very poor trolling, and I recommend you go back to troll school.

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 13:12 | 2776308 Ricky Bobby
Ricky Bobby's picture

UH OH don't get the true believers stirred up. Next the Tylers will publish an article bad mouthing FDR. Chalky Good - Mittens Bad, hey you low volts you got to move away from that mind trap, but of course you won't becuase it serves your masters purpose.

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 09:47 | 2775977 the 300000000th...
the 300000000th percent's picture

Its so true, Greenspan traded the dot com bust for the housing boom and game on. It wasnt Clinton it was the evil wizzard. If I hear one more brain dead liberal say "but, but, but, Clinton actually lowered the defict" one more time, I think that brain dead liberal will be the one I decide not to argue with one more time, but rather to just punch them in the face.

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 09:56 | 2775994 Snidley Whipsnae
Snidley Whipsnae's picture

+1 but punching them in the face does no good... except it might make you feel better but does nothing for the punchees knowledge.

We have arrived at the moment predicted by H L Mencken so long ago...

"The government consists of a gang of men exactly like you and me. They have, taking one with another, no special talent for the business of government; they have only a talent for getting and holding office. Their principal device to that end is to search out groups who pant and pine for something they can't get and to promise to give it to them. Nine times out of ten that promise is worth nothing. The tenth time is made good by looting A to satisfy B. In other words, government is a broker in pillage, and every election is sort of an advance auction sale of stolen goods."

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 11:42 | 2776143 docj
docj's picture

They have, taking one with another, no special talent for the business of government; they have only a talent for getting and holding office.

This of course applies to many, many politicians - but doesn't this really sort of fit Smokey McChoomPrompter to a "T"?

Racist, I know. I denounce myself.

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 14:47 | 2776510 Pure Evil
Pure Evil's picture

Docj, there are no such things as ray-cists.

Although, I will denounce you as a homophobic Islamophope.

Everytime I see Curious George, the little brown muslim monkey, he looks gayer and gayer, almost like he's a flamer.

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 13:22 | 2776322 RichardP
RichardP's picture

In other words, government is a broker in pillage ...

If you study history, you will see that pillage is a constant, back to the beginning of time.  Pillage is one of the side effects of testosterone.

If pillage is a constant, then it becomes - not whether pillage, but who will be doing the pillage.  Our government has improved on the savages in the arena of pillage by creating a controlled pillage environment.  We get to vote on who does the pillaging and to what ends the pillaging is put.

For those of you who think there is absolutely no difference between the political parties - that it actually doesn't matter which party is in power, answer this:  if the Republicans had been in total control for the past 100 years, do you think we would have been saddled with all of the programs of the Great Society?

There may not be a difference in parties over the issue of whether pillage.  But there is a difference between parties in the ends to which the pillage is put.

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 10:17 | 2776015 Ayn NY
Ayn NY's picture

Why do you argue with people who are impervious to facts and logic? It just gives you hypertension and you're not going to change them. Anyone whose starting point is that there is no economic reality and you can get something for nothing is as unreachable as a religious zealot.

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 11:58 | 2776184 LongBallsShortBrains
LongBallsShortBrains's picture

Never argue with an idiot. First they pull you down to their level, and then they beat you with experience.

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 10:36 | 2776039 presk_eel_pundit
presk_eel_pundit's picture

But, but, but, I've never heard anyone say a Republican lowered the deficit. In fact, Bush's last budget holds the record for annual deficits. And that was with a Greenspan/Bernacke zero rate policy. As a person, Clinton may be a snake, but he was a much better President than Bush.

That said, both political parties suck! Two sides of the same coin.

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 10:50 | 2776060 adr
adr's picture

mmm no. I would say Clinton was worse than Bush. But that is still saying what's worse, having your leg or arm cut off.

The Bush years erased a lot of freedoms, but the Clinton years destroyed the sustainable America economy. In 1990 there were millions of independent hardware stores, by 2000 there were less than 10,000. Same thing goes for nearly every type of locally owned business.

Clinton presided over the largest expansion of publicly traded business and reduction of skilled labor in history. Great for inside shareholders, terrible for workers. There is a reason why the average wage for my profession went from $75k in the early 90s to around $40k in 2000, and it wasn't because people al of a sudden got worse at their jobs. It was because so many skilled jobs vanished that there became a massive surplus of labor.

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 11:11 | 2776092 Buckaroo Banzai
Buckaroo Banzai's picture

You forgot the most important part: that cocksucker Clinton sold us out to the Chinese.

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 11:23 | 2776110 IBelieveInMagic
IBelieveInMagic's picture

If you must know, Nixon sold us to the Chinese -- all the other Presidents have just followed in his footsteps.

But, we got to enjoy a gluttony of consumption in the meantime.

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 11:53 | 2776176 prodigious_idea
prodigious_idea's picture

Too young to remember Nixon?

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 11:59 | 2776185 prodigious_idea
prodigious_idea's picture

So Clinton started the "big box" retail business model?  In hardware such as Eagle Hardware (now killed off by . . .) Home Depot and Lowes?  Come on, he wasn't that powerful.  Globalization and the push for ultra-efficient economies of scale, coupled with economic conditions that allowed employers to push down wages have crushed the local merchant and wages.  Walmart, Costco, PriceClub . . .

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 11:15 | 2776087 Yardfarmer
Yardfarmer's picture


Does it matter to what degree of foreknowledge and design the policies implemented in the political and economic management of our social order are undertaken if they are based on an ill informed, misplaced, conception and faulty principles? In this respect the vaunted and seemingly transcendent cycles of economic activity partake only of the expectations of human aspiration and inventiveness which create them and their inevitable downfall and defeat is assured not so much by the blind forces of nature but by the inherent capacity for self delusion and deception, the lasting and tragic inheritance of our species.

Thus even the elites of the supposed oligarchical hierarchy which seem to exert such omniscient and plenipotentiary control over the political and economic structures of society possess severe and distinct limitations and perhaps even more so because they are possessed of an inherent moral blindness, a necessary concomitant of their unswerving devotion to the attainment of power and control over the destinies of nations and peoples. Such alleged conspiratorial cabals which apparently wield such awesome and unmistakeable powers, ultimately become the very agents which bring about the manifestations of the supposedly immutable cyclic influences in the economic and political spheres and most often not according to their own inscrutable reckoning and sometimes in a manner that contradicts their avowed intentions.


 A radical intervention by the Chairman of the Federal Reserve, Alan Greenspan, to stave off the deflationary collapse and recession of the natural cyclic descent into the Winter phase of the K wave economic cycle was accomplished in 2000. Greenspan's intervention was accomplished by an aggressive loose monetary policy effected by sharp credit cuts down to 1% from May 2000 to June 2003 accompanied by massive injections of liquidity. This policy was supplemented by the "recycling of vast US deficits by creditor nations through the US Bond markets." The resulting globalization of capital markets resulted in the exportation of US inflationary policy to international markets and laid the groundwork for the worldwide economic meltdown we are presently witnessing."This attempt to defy economic gravity and resist the natural economic cycle that has been a feature of the capitalist economies since the industrial revolution" has played a large part in the massive  and unprecedented economic dislocations we are presently experiencing.


Sun, 09/09/2012 - 09:52 | 2775984 kato
kato's picture

Use of "Slick Willy" = most likely just another hater.

Clinton listened to Robert Rubin, even though he had to make a liar out of himself for reneging the promised 'middle class tax cut', and the economy and state of the nation were in far, far better shape than under the since-Clinton Republican administration, even if tax revenue was inflated by whatever bubbles were taking place during Clinton's term.

And Reagan was the Original Big Spender - remember the then staggering $200 billion annual then deficits under Reagan? And his mantra 'deficits don't matter'? That would be the mantra again IF a Republican were president and he would be lauded for 'saving' the country. Really. It is very much a matter of how the game is spun; you are just spinning.

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 09:53 | 2775988 gjp
gjp's picture

They're all the same, don't you get it?  All worthy of hate, all serving the plutocrats and robbing the peons while bombing the little people overseas.  Red or blue not a shred of difference.

Reagan and Clinton in particular worth picking on because of the myths their respective party establishments have built around their records.

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 11:00 | 2776073 adr
adr's picture

The world of the 1980s was much different than the world of the 90s and today. Reagan ran up huge deficits, but much of the deficit came from the expansion of social welfare that Reagan was forced to accept to get anything he wanted passed in the first place.

During the 1980s the first generation born from the Johnson Great Society were entering adulthood. The slaves born to serve the democratic party were granted their welfare checks and the ghettos of America spread like a cancer. Each one of these slaves reproduced at a rapid rate to create even more slaves that would cement the power of the big city democrats. The 80s was all about the welfare mom popping out 12 kids for government cash. Crimes we are definately paying for now.

The expansion of the welfare class in the 70s and 80s has led to more than $1 trillion per year being spent on social welfare. That spending dwarfs the defense spending of Reagan, spending that did end the Cold War.

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 11:15 | 2776099 Buckaroo Banzai
Buckaroo Banzai's picture

PRECISELY. At least Reagan's deficits accomplished something. LBJ, Obama, and the Bushes ran up deficits in social spending obligations that simply have created a legacy of permanent dependency.

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 12:05 | 2776198 blunderdog
blunderdog's picture

   much of the deficit came from the expansion of social welfare

That's not true.  The biggest cause of deficits growth during the Reagan years were the tax cuts.  He did significantly increase defense spending at the same time, but that would not have resulted in the debt increase it did if it hadn't been coupled with the tax cuts.

The social programs expansion during the Reagan years were funded, and amazingly, didn't cost that much.

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 17:36 | 2776806 GeezerGeek
GeezerGeek's picture

Saying the tax cuts were the biggest cause of deficit growth under Reagan conveniently overlooks the fact that the Democrats, led by Tip O'Neill, had promised to reduce spending. They reneged, of course. Rather like they later got Bush 1 to agree to tax increases by promising major spending cuts. Those cuts never occurred, of course. Never believe any politician who says he'll actually reduce spending.

Mon, 09/10/2012 - 11:21 | 2778506 blunderdog
blunderdog's picture

Well, my point was really just that, although deficits (and debt) grew dramatically during the Reagan administration, it wasn't really because spending increased THAT dramatically.  Spending increased a BIT, and revenue dropped a LOT.

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 13:31 | 2776343 RichardP
RichardP's picture

The expansion of the welfare class in the 70s and 80s ...

... ran up deficits in social spending obligations that simply have created a legacy of permanent dependency.

Do either of those statements incorporate the expense incurred because of the expansion of corporate welfare?  And military (weapons) welfare?

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 12:53 | 2776275 ZeroAvatar
ZeroAvatar's picture

Anytime someone uses the term 'hater', I detect the stench of liberalism.

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 09:55 | 2775991 etresoi
etresoi's picture

A country gets the politicians it deserves. Clinton, Bush, Obama, Romney... need I say more?

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 09:59 | 2775996 Snidley Whipsnae
Snidley Whipsnae's picture


Let the wordsmith say a bit more for you and I... Few men with the talent of Twain, Frost and Mencken pass this way...

"When a candidate for public office faces the voters he does not face men of sense; he faces a mob of men whose chief distinguishing mark is the fact that they are quite incapable of weighing ideas, or even of comprehending any save the most elemental — men whose whole thinking is done in terms of emotion, and whose dominant emotion is dread of what they cannot understand. So confronted, the candidate must either bark with the pack or be lost... All the odds are on the man who is, intrinsically, the most devious and mediocre — the man who can most adeptly disperse the notion that his mind is a virtual vacuum. The Presidency tends, year by year, to go to such men. As democracy is perfected, the office represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. We move toward a lofty ideal. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last, and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron."

H L Mencken

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 10:57 | 2776068 etresoi
etresoi's picture

Thank you.  I know that I'll never match H L Mencken for wordsmithing.

Just think... Mencken died in 1956 and the usa has been in an ever steepening decline ever since.  The good news is that the end is in sight.

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 11:05 | 2776080 adr
adr's picture

I just put it simply as:

The larger a group becomes, the dumber its collective brain becomes.

In the case of 300 million people, that collective brain couldn't work a fryer at McDonalds. Perhaps that is why the education system created by the entity that was voted in by that collective, can barely teach a kid enough skills to work the fryer at McDonalds.

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 12:06 | 2776200 LongBallsShortBrains
LongBallsShortBrains's picture

When you think about how intelligent your average person is, please remember that half the people out there are less intelligent than the average person.

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 11:46 | 2776156 docj
docj's picture

Edwards: Why the big secret? People are smart. They can handle it.
Kay: A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it. Fifteen hundred years ago everybody knew the Earth was the center of the universe. Five hundred years ago, everybody knew the Earth was flat, and fifteen minutes ago, you knew that humans were alone on this planet. Imagine what you'll know tomorrow.

Who know that Agent K was cribbing Mencken?

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 10:00 | 2775997 the 300000000th...
the 300000000th percent's picture

One thing Reagan, Clinton, Bush, Oboma, and Romney all have in common besides being presidents and 1 president hopfull is I want to punch them all in the face

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 17:40 | 2776812 GeezerGeek
GeezerGeek's picture

Reagan's dead, so I'd skip him and include Carter instead. Besides, of all those listed, Reagan is the only one who might just have punched back. The rest would go home crying.


Sun, 09/09/2012 - 10:14 | 2776013 ejmoosa
ejmoosa's picture

No, it gets the politicians that are served up to us by people we do not know and do not select.   We need to strip that power by A) increasing the number of Senators and Representatives to the same constituent ratio we had in 1900, for starters.

This is the ONLY way to give Libertarians and other third parties a chance.  And I do not give a damn if there are 30 or so communist party members in a Congress.  Because then we could easily show how their platform is in line with the current leadership.


Next, we need to get rid of the career politicians by getting rid of the damn perks of seniority.  You are re-elected 20 times?  Great!  But you still do not get to wield more power than my freshman Libertarian Representative. Think Equal Representation.

The Tea Party made great strides in 2010, only to be given the worst committees and no power.

Then all we have heard since is how the Tea Party had done nothing....except obstruct.  They have been the punching bag for BOTH parties.

Time to change the game.




Sun, 09/09/2012 - 10:53 | 2776063 Sledge
Sledge's picture

good catch EJ.
As if it wasn't enough that the Federal Reserve Act and The Internal Revenue Service came into play in 1913, they passed the 17th Amendment which not too many people talk about.

Prior to 1913 all U.S. senators were appointed by state legislatures to the senate - not elected. There was a good reason for this. Our Founding Fathers Knew that we need a mechanism to counteract unbridled "democracy" which they saw as one of the greatest threats to our new nation. The idea behind the appointment of Senators by the states was that it would balance out the electoral process used to elect Representatives. But with the passage of the 17th Amendment, which some think was also not properly ratified, the suffrage rights of the individual states now became tainted with the same politicization process that involved the election of Representatives, subverting the will of the Founding Fathers. With passage of this Amendment, states now could no longer appoint two senators who would represent the entire state's interests any longer. People no longer would pay as close attention to their state politics and scrutinize those they elected to appoint senators. Just take a look at Senate elections today. This "august" body now runs on party tickets and is subject to the taint of huge corporate interests and lobby money from across the nation. The cost of campaigns alone virtually insures that incumbants will have a massive advantage over challengers. Party politics has become the game of the year - the election year, that is - and the money changing hands on campaigns for the senate races has become an abomination. The welfare of a Senator's state is secondary-if even considered at all-to the power and greed
of the individual senator.

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 17:43 | 2776815 GeezerGeek
GeezerGeek's picture

As long as John Boehner is in power there will be no Republican backbone. Even Barney Frank has more backbone than Boehner.

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 18:25 | 2776873 Stanley Lord
Stanley Lord's picture

Completely agree with you on Boehner, plus he cries too much.

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 09:56 | 2775992 Gloomy
Gloomy's picture

A really excellent read:


Diverging Like It's 1929

An excerpt:

"It's certainly not uncommon for individual stocks - or markets - to enjoy their most spectacular gains right as they confront rising fundamental headwinds. Indeed, whether it was the DJIA in 1929 or technology stocks in late-99/early-2000, deteriorating fundamentals actually played an instrumental role in respective dramatic market rallies. In both case, bearish short positions had been initiated in expectation of profiting from the wide gulf between inflating stock prices and deflating fundamental backdrops. In both cases, short squeezes played a prevailing role in fueling "blow off" speculative rallies.

Actually, the most precarious backdrops unfold during a confluence of serious fundamental deterioration, perceived acute systemic fragilities, aggressive monetary policymaking and an already highly speculative market environment. This was the backdrop during 1929 and 1999, and I would argue it is consistent with the current environment. Excess liquidity and rampant speculation drove prices higher in '29 and '99, as the unwinding of short positions (and the attendant speculative targeting of short squeezes) created rocket fuel for a surging market. Over time, intense greed and fear and episodes of panic buying overwhelmed the marketplace. Would be sellers moved to the sidelines and markets dislocated (extraordinary demand and supply imbalances fostered dramatic spikes in market pricing and emotions). Market dislocations - and resulting price gains - were only exacerbated when those watching prudently from the sidelines were forced to capitulate and jump aboard.

The technology Bubble was spectacular - but it was also more specific to an individual sector than it was systemic. Today's Bubble is unique in the degree to which it encompasses global markets and economies. Systemic fragilities these days make 1999 appear inconsequential in comparison. The backdrop has more similarities to 1929 - and, not coincidently, policymakers are absolutely resolved to avoid a similar fate. Thus far, policy measures have notably succeeded in fostering over-liquefied and highly speculative markets on a manic course divergent from troubling underlying fundamentals."


Sun, 09/09/2012 - 09:56 | 2775993 Colonel Klink
Colonel Klink's picture

Two heads, same snake.  High functioning sociopaths seem to rise to the top.  Just like crap in the bowl.


Fuck'em one and all.  New boss, same as the old boss.  We need a viable third party.  Won't happen until the SHTF.

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 10:14 | 2776003 goldfreak
goldfreak's picture

Let's see: Nafta, "free" trade agreement with China, repeal of Glass Steagall, Futures and commodities modernization act

Bubba did a great job


Ray Charles-What'd i say/Lyrics

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 10:59 | 2776071 Ponzi_Scheme
Ponzi_Scheme's picture

Correct. Labor participation peaked under Clinton as China entered the picture. No one speaks of the bribes as the PrC bought the White House. Greedscam may have papered it over (literally). The fundamental job situation for the unskilled and skilled alike changed. It has been an actuarial decline since. When an honest assessment is done, Nafta and China MFN will stand out. Glass Steagal is icing on the cake. Rubin, Climton and Greedscam all deserve to be brought to trial for treason.

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 10:14 | 2776006 dwdollar
dwdollar's picture

The pressure to be in one of the two "great" moron camps is incredible.

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 10:15 | 2776014 Shell Game
Shell Game's picture

And yet, a great weight is lifted once one divorces them.  


On another note, those two camps will not be robust survivors when this ship goes down.

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 10:57 | 2776067 Snidley Whipsnae
Snidley Whipsnae's picture

dwdollar... Yes, sad isn't it?

Bread and circus... My football team is better than your football team... My politician made fewer mistakes than your politician.

The goal of the 1% is to divide the 99% into as many fueding camps as possible.

Divide and conquer.

As TD points out in his 'funding' post... It's the bankers and corporations that will fund the campaigns and it's they that will benefit no matter which of the two parties win.

Anyone that believes that a change of parties will make a difference in the direction of the US or World economies is simply lieing to themselves... or delusional... or a troll.

Time to wake up people!


Sun, 09/09/2012 - 10:12 | 2776009 DavosSherman
DavosSherman's picture

"With the unemployment rate still stubbornly high at 8.1%,"

Try 23.8%.

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 10:17 | 2776019 Shell Game
Shell Game's picture

That single digit nonsense insults anyone with a greater intelligence than a tree stump.

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 10:15 | 2776016 americanspirit
americanspirit's picture

His taste in women tells you all you need to know about the quality of his mind and character.

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 11:33 | 2776130 WTFx10
WTFx10's picture

His Jooish tart was a gift from the employers\owners. His wife was just something to make him look legit. Only one kid?

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 12:06 | 2776203 blunderdog
blunderdog's picture

Lewinski was hired for the intern position because of a family connection that contributed heavily to GHW Bush's campaigns, if you really want to dig into that.  Funny the way orbits intersect.

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 16:52 | 2776734 nmewn
nmewn's picture

From...Read My Lips to wrap your it were ;-)


Sun, 09/09/2012 - 10:18 | 2776017 Sathington Willougby
Sathington Willougby's picture

Obama has a thing or two to learn from "all hail president Clin-Ton".  Clinton was the slow thrust of the dagger through the EM shield where the fast ones are repelled easily.  The Marxists of the 60s learned this, the direct thrust they used with violent riots amongst the blacks failed.  FF to 2008, the indirect addiction of the masses to govt cheese has everyone by the short hairs.  Obama [his handlers really] are moving way too fast.  The thieves are getting greedy.  Blowback is imminent.

Of course this doesn't happen in a vacuum.  The other wing of the single party is getting a bit jealous.  It's their turn for plunder.  But, they suffer from the same problem, blowback on the racketeering and propaganda smearing is coming.  Romney broke too many finger and hips already.  He flipped too many votes.  He paid off too many blowhard talk radio tools.  He pulled too many shenanigans at the convention with teleprompter Beaner and trying to make an UNPERSON of "HE WHO CAN'T BE NAMED".  Bye bye GOP, hello 4 more years of unabashed Leninist Marxism, Romney stepped on way too many that he's going to meet on the way down.  Only the lower ranks of liberty people will have a chance.

Here is where Liberty is winning - a whole new cross-section of people understand this simple concept - Liberty is between your ears and your ribs.  Exercise it one decision at a time.  Individuals will fix this.

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 10:18 | 2776020 Juan Wild
Juan Wild's picture

It doesn't matter what they say in a speech. Look carefully into their eyes and you will see the shame they feel for letting America down. This game they play, this Kabuki theater is getting pretty tiresome to watch. Their legacy will ultimately be one of cowardess. Their contribution to tyranny here and abroad, their lies, the legions of innocent people murdered by their actions. They are cowards! They allow a foreign entity to control our money. They allow a foreign entity to control our laws. Their day of reckoning will not be pretty.

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 10:24 | 2776025 Monk
Monk's picture

Not smart governance but simply Washington working for Wall Street and Big Business, which has been the case for three decades or so.


Sun, 09/09/2012 - 10:30 | 2776029 icanhasbailout
icanhasbailout's picture

I was tracking the Clinton Body Count back when fresh names were being added to the list regularly.

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 10:34 | 2776030 Nid
Nid's picture

Maybe I missed it, but I don't see how this article can be written without mentioning the massive tax reform passed in '96 and its effect of unleashing nearly a half a $Trillion in previously pent up assets into the economy.

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 10:33 | 2776031 Atomizer
Atomizer's picture

Bill Clinton: I never inhaled Barack Obama Choom.

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 10:36 | 2776035 deez nutz
deez nutz's picture

"the jobs are coming, the JOBS ARE COMING!!! you just have to trust me!!" ............

hope and changed spoken in a different phrase.

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 10:36 | 2776037 bullet
bullet's picture

as always... the view of Clinton revolves around what your definition of "is" is...

Sun, 09/09/2012 - 12:54 | 2776264 Pope Clement
Pope Clement's picture

Maybe the Aristotelian 'isness' thingy is an area where Clinton swerved into something of importance namely the Korszybski observation that the map is not the territory and language seems to be a type of map.

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!