Proof: Democrats at Fault for the Recession

Claims have been bandied about that President Bush was at fault for the economic down-turn that began in late 2007.  Until now, Democrats have pointed the finger at our 43rd President, stating that he single-handedly pushed our nation to the brink of economic collapse.  That stops today.  Examining unemployment, national debt data, and GDP growth, the truth becomes clear and apparent.  President Bush was not at fault for the recession we are in.  The Democrats who took over Congress in 2007 are.

From 1995 to January of 2007, Republicans held at least one house of Congress.  However, in the 2006 mid-term elections, Democrats won control of both the House and Senate.  They took their new offices in January, 2007.  Soon after that time until now, the United States has entered a deep recession, often attributed to President Bush.  However, examining the actions of the Democratic Congress and the effects that came, the truth is revealed.

Unemployment is a figure that commands the attention of everyone, from the rich to the poor.  Examining its data seems the logical place to start.  While President Bush and Republicans controlled Congress, unemployment stayed around 5%, increasing by slightly over 1% after 9/11, from 4.7% to 6.3% in January of 2002.  However, it eventually fell to 4.1% by the time of the November 2006 election.  After Democrats took office, they passed incredibly expensive new bills, including raising minimum wage and the CLEAN Energy Act.

Under the Democrats, unemployment started to balloon.  It stated to climb, rising past 4.5%, past 5%, past 6%, and past 6.5%, all the way to 8.5% by the time they had been in office for just two years.  By then, President Obama had been inaugurated, and unemployment continued to rise as spending increased.  This chart explains, in depth, the bills Democrats passed, and the effects they had from November 2006-March 2010 (click for a sharper, bigger image):

As you can see, the massive new spending that has been taking place from 2007-the present has had a major effect on unemployment.

A large National Debt data is also something that Democrats like to blame President Bush for.  However, examining our debt as a percent of our GDP shows the truth again.  This number sounds complicated, but in fact it is pretty simple.  "Our debt as a percent of our GDP" simply means that if our GDP is $100 and our debt is $60, then our "debt as a percent of our GDP" is 60%.  From 2001-2007 (when Republicans left office), the percent of our debt grew from 57.4% to 65.6%, or 8.8% (around 1.2% a year).  Though the number did rise, you must take into account 9/11, the devastation from Hurricane Katrina, and the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.  Further, from 2005-2007, it slowed to an average of .5% per year, which means it may have began to go down in the near future.

Then Democrats took office.  In their first full year in office, the debt as a percent of GDP rose 4.6%, from 65.6% to 70.2%.  The next year was even more astounding, as the percent rose 15.9%, to 86.1%.  So far this year, the percent is up another 5% to 91.1%.  This graph explains in greater detail (click for a better image):

See the huge spike on the right side?  That's when Democrats took control of Congress.

The growth of our very economy is also very important to examine.  Under President Bush and the Republican Congress, our GDP grew on average around 3%, peaking in the fall of 2003 to nearly 7%.  The GDP only decreased in the immediate aftermath of 9/11, and that was only for one quarter.

Then Democrats took Congress.  At the beginning of 2008, our GDP sharply dropped.  By the end of 2008, it was retracting at a rate of almost 7%.  This graph shows everything in more detail (click for a bigger, sharper image):

The fall in growth under Democrats is amazing.

Examining this data, there can only be one conclusion: the United States entered our recession as the result of the Democratic takeover of Congress in 2007.  The truth is out.  Once again, the Democratic strategy of blaming President Bush for everything is revealed to be a lie.  It is quite possible that the only way to remedy the recession we are in is to once again elect a Republican majority.

The truth is out.

If you like this story and favor the truth, please consider submitting this to Reddit, Digg, StumbleUpon, or any forums or people that you think may be interested.

Don't forget to comment and to bookmark our site!

Consider advertising on our site!

Chart of the Day - Deficits With & Without Iraq War.

What does this chart from the American Thinker tell us?

1. The 7 year Iraqi War never really impacted our National Deficit.

2. Deficit spending under President Bush decreased 50% in 5 years.

3. Congressional Democrats ballooned the Deficit in just 3 Budget's.

4. Bush's Tax cuts almost balanced the budget, despite big spending.

We all know that President Bush was a spender, and that the Republican controlled Congress was more inclined to go along with his spending. But as you can clearly see in the chart above: That spending was not really impacting the deficit, Bush's tax cuts were filling the coffers of the federal government, and if it wasn't for Clinton's failed housing scheme, America would probably be in solid fiscal health at this moment.

What say you?

P.S. - You can tell Bush's tax cuts were filling the federal government's coffers by taking into account the increased spending, yet the decreasing deficit.

Consider advertising on our site!

Will Matheson remain in Congress?

It's true that Utah Republicans voted out a fine US Senator because he wasn't "Conservative" enough for their taste buds, but could Utah Democrats really be on their way to voting out Congressman Jim Matheson because he's too "Conservative" for their taste buds?

The Utah Democratic Convention was close in late May: As Matheson received 55% of the vote, but Claudia Wright, a leftwing loon who has been endorsed by a former Green Party candidate for President, pulled off 45% of delegate votes, despite her too-far-too-left-for-Utah-voters-stances and positions.

According to a new poll from ksl.com in Salt Lake City: 52% of Utah Democrats support Matheson in today's Primary, but 33% of Utah Democrats also support Wright, with 15% of voters undecided as of June 18th. However, there is bad news for Matheson as well - 53% of Democrats in Matheson's district believe he's "not liberal enough" at the same time: Conflicting poll results.

So what's going to happen? Democrats were surprised when a Conservative State Legislator defeated Mollohan in West Virginia's 1st district Primary, but will Democrats in Utah really commit political suicide by replacing their one chance at victory in November, just for ideological purity?

I have no idea what Utah Democrats will be doing this afternoon and evening at the polls, but I would like to warn them at their own risk - just as Conservatives have failed in California time, and time again, Liberals will fail in Utah over, and over again.

Just 22% of Americans are "straight line" voters.

When Glenn Beck, a well known Libertarian radio and television talk show host, described the voting patterns of America as 15% beholden to Republicans, 15% beholden to Democrats, and 70% open to other candidates, he was deadwrong. To be honest, those numbers touted by Glenn Beck are too generous, according to a recent poll.

The April 2010 Battleground Poll asked 1,000 registered voters a series of political, religious and ideological questions. One of which dealt with voting patterns, and which party had the voters supported during recent elections.

The results are interesting:

Straight GOP - 10%.
Mostly GOP - 21%.
More GOP than DEM - 12%.
Independent/the person - 5%.
More DEM than GOP - 11%.
Mostly DEM - 24%.
Straight DEM - 12%.
Unsure/Refused - 6%.

Just 22% of American voters are strictly beholden to either political party, and 23% of voters favor their "perspective" party by a relative "more than" margin. Considering our polarized political system, it's hard to imagine that 67% of admitted American voters have supported candidates from either party.

This doesn't mean that the perfect candidate (if there ever was such a thing) could receive 75% plus of the nationwide vote, but it does explain why some Northern Republicans and Southern Democrats can win by substantial margins. In a state like New York or even Tennessee, the voters are not afraid of electing "moderates" from the traditionally opposite party.

Though irrelevant on a national scale, it does confirm Glenn Beck's point that most Americans are not "down the party line" voters or individuals, unlike me and 22% of the electoral populace.

Further more, when "Independent" and "unknown/refused" voters are removed from the equation, 48% of voters have a pattern of somewhat supporting Republicans, while 52% of voters have a pattern of somewhat supporting Democrats. Leaving America with 5 to 11% of the electoral populace who hold ultimate power come election day, confirming Karl Rove's estimation of "Independent" voters.

Thoughts?

Bookmark our site!

Consider advertising on our site!

Weekly Standard Reporter Shoved Outside of Democratic Fundraiser

No comment means no comment. When Martha Coakley was asked a question by John McCormack of The Weekly Standard she elected not to answer. Michael Meehan was caught on videotape adding an exclamation point to her response.

Meehan initialy claimed that McCormack " fell over a low fence but then changed his response when told the incident was captured on video.

Coakley was quoted as saying she was not "privy" to the facts surrounding the incident, although a still photo shows her looking on as the incident occurred.

Coakley stated "I know there were people following, including two from the Brown campaign who have been very aggressive in their stalking," she said. "I'm not sure what happened. I know something occurred, but I'm not privy to the facts. I'm sure it will come out, but I'm not aware of it."

Sounds like a little bit of paranoia is infiltrating the Coakley campaign.

The following video shows the incident in question.



Fox News has a nice writeup on the incident here.

It's nice to see the new tone adopted by the Democratic party as of late. So much for civility.


Bookmark our site!

Consider advertising on our site!

Just Keeps Getting Worse

It was bad enough when we had Republicans who wanted to grant citizenship to millions of criminals, who illegally crossed our borders, took our jobs, and a good portion - are just plain dirty criminals who have ended up in prison. All illegals should be kicked out of this Nation, that would not only restore our laws to have some meaning, free up millions of jobs, but would save states billions of dollars a year.

So what are the Democrats proposing in Congress? They not only want to grant amnesty, and officially have the United States become a Nation of one party rule, but they want to give all 12 million + illegals in the United States health care. That's right, the messed up, big government, socialistic, jackasses want to waste even more money on those that don't belong here.

Now I am against this health care package for a long list of reasons, however this should be one of the highest for everyone - the fact, our government wants to spend even more money on this criminals who are for some unknown reason celebrated by the Democrat party. Some in the party even claim that illegally coming to the United States is not a crime, HELLO?!

Its bad enough the Democrats want to break our own laws, give criminals citizenship, and establish one party rule in America. Do we really need to add this health care bullcrap in top of it, where not only does it destroy our health care system, it will once more pander to the criminals from the Nation of Mexico.

When will it stop?

When will we finally have enough voices in Congress who will pass real health care reform - TORT reform, which has been 100% proven to work in the great state of Mississippi, instead of ruining the entire system, and destroying Capitalism in America. When will we have enough voices to close our borders, to deport the illegals, and finally have our Borders, Immigration standards, our laws, and our sovereignty restored? I hope soon, for the sake of America.


Remember to bookmark our site!
Consider advertising on our site!
Also, if you need to search anything on Google, please use the bar below:

Bill Clinton Donated $2,400 to McCain Campaign

In what could lead to a political brawl, sources from MoveOn.org revealed early Thursday that former President William J. Clinton, donated $2,400, or the legal limit, to John McCain's unsuccessful 2008 bid for the White House.

The donations began in July of that year, after his wife conceded the Democratic nomination to Senator Obama. Many sources cite Clinton's anger and frustration over his wife's loss, especially after she won the popular vote.

"He was pissed," said former advisor Lanny Davis, "No doubt about it. Whether he'd do something like this... I don't know."

The article sites government watchdog sites, like Open Secrets, in the revelation of the campaign donations. While both Clintons were ostensibly campaigning for the Democratic nominee, it appears that both were hoping for him to lose.

On July 12, just before the Senator's much-vaunted trip to Europe, former President Clinton donated $1,200 from what was believed to be an inactive bank account dating from the time that he was Governor of Arkansas.

Three weeks later, two separate donations of $800 and $400 respectively, were given under a pseudonym of Larry Kendall. The address of the pseudonym was traced to the Clintons' summer home in New York. The name raised eyebrows, as this was a Clinton confidant during the Whitewater investigation.

The article on MoveOn probed further:

Whether this jeopordizes Hillary's position as Secretary of State is unknown. However, this does prove that Bill represented the reactionary wing of the party, while Barack was helping the PROGRESSIVE wing. Hillary has to decide whether or not to condemn her husband and break with the past or try and build a better FUTURE!

As of 11:00 am on April 23, the original article was removed. There has been no official comment from the White House.

Consider advertising on our site!
Also, if you need to search anything on Google, please use the bar below:

The Stimulus Bill: Dems Follow Obama Blindly, Republicans Squabble, the Public Loses

The economic stimulus bill, which has ballooned to over 900 Billion Dollars is yet to cause Harry Reid to bat an eye. "The world is waiting to see what we're going to do in the next 24 hours," said Reid, who fails to see the billions of pork that have been thrown into the bill.

Is the stimulus package necessary? The argument is heated and both opinions have valid points. But to blindly go along, as Reid is doing, trying to look good by following after Obama, is ridiculous. Where is the devotion to do what is right and not weigh tax-payers down with billions upon billions of pork barrel spending?

Dick Durbin also follows blindly as he is led astray from his constituents: "If I could do this in a symbolic way, that their measures account for one page," Durbin said, ""One page of this bill. You listen to the things that they list, that they found so objectionable, they count, in dollar terms, to about one page of this bill." Can I just ask this: if it is just one "page," why not just take it out? Or is this unity amongst brothers and sisters not all it's cracked up to be?

"It is time for Congress to act," President Obama stated. "It is time to pass an Economic Recovery and Reinvestment Plan to get our economy moving again." Why can't we just take out the pork? Take it out and vote on the blasted thing.

Not to sound like a nut, but the probable explanation is that the Democrats want this bill to fail. Yes, I said it. Why? Because they can point to the Republicans and say to their constituents, "See, they made our economy falter, they don't care about you." It's a masterful move: if the bill passes and succeeds, the Democrats (and Obama) get the credit. If it goes down in flames, the Democrats blame the Republicans. It's a win-win for them.

For us, however, time and money hang in the balance.