Jan 28 2008

Did The NY Times Admit Bush Economy Is Historically Great?

Published by at 11:17 am under All General Discussions

When you get into pretzel logic loops, trying to exaggerate a claim, you can sometimes inadvertently end up making the opposite case as your logic twists around so much to try and make your fantasy a reality. That apparently happened in the NY Times today as they tried to make the current market correction (which is already disappearing in people’s minds) into a big deal – by admitting how good the Bush economy has been up to this point in time:

Mr. Bush has spent years presiding over an economic climate of growth that would be the envy of most presidents. Yet much to the consternation of his political advisers, he has had trouble getting credit for it, in large part because Americans were consumed by the war in Iraq.

Amazingly the truth does come through – even to the BDS driven NY Times. I guess that is a backhanded endorsement of the Bush economy if I ever saw one. 8 years of envious economic news marred by two weeks of unsubstantiated panic. I’ll take that any day. The two weeks is nothing out of 416 weeks – not even 1%. So that means 99+% of the time it was good under Bush. Glad to see the NY Times finally waking up – sort of. H/T American Thinker.

23 responses so far

23 Responses to “Did The NY Times Admit Bush Economy Is Historically Great?”

  1. conman says:

    WWS, you are clueless. You are wrong on so many fronts.

    First, the European economy was not the only economy to panic last week. The world economy took a big hit, including the Asian economy. Maybe you can explain to the rest of us how a European bank loss caused the Asian economy to dip and why the Federal Reserves thought lowering interest rates would fix a problem with the European market.

    Second, it was not the largest bank fraud in history. The 1991 scandal that led to the demise of the Bank of Credit and Commerce International exceeded $10 billion at the time. Get your facts straight.

    Third, your comment about Feldstein are laughable. You obviously have no idea who he is, which only reveals your ignorance. Feldstein is a leading conservative economist whom was one of two people (Bernacke was the other) expected to get the nod the Chairman of the Federal Reserves. He is also president of the President of the NBER, the organisation that officially declares and dates recessions. You completely dismiss his concerns based solely on the fact that his prediction was greater than 50%. That is really logical.

  2. WWS says:

    Conman, when an idiot like you calls me “clueless” I take it as one of the highest compliments I’ve recieved all week.

    Feldstein’s remarks are some of the most worthless economic nonsense out there – he’s simply covering his bets so that no matter what happens, he can say “yep, I said there was a 50% chance of that, didn’t I?”

  3. AJStrata says:

    Conman, you are clueless. The reason Asia was hit is they have tons of money in the EU. The two regions have had joint economies for centuries. I mean Duh! ever look at a map slick?