I missed the 2nd part of your post earlier somehow.. In 1992, I was a kid so I din't really know what was going around except for my own little world.. But looking at the that presidential debate now, it seems the main talking point then were the same as they are now.. Replace Perot with Paul, Bush Sr. with Bush Jr. and Clinton with Obama and you'd have the almost identical sounding debate in 2008 (Except Obama is probably the 10% of Clinton, if I'm being generous). 20 years later on, nothing has changed even a little bit. Except for the size of Debt. It seems years after years, people promised for a 'Change' that no one delivered. They promised to control the debt, that no one was able to. in 1992 Debt to GDP ratio - 50% in 2012 Debt to GDP ratio - 100%+ Things have gone bad to worse, but everything else remained the same.. One side is selling hope and dreams, the other is selling the change.
As someone who was a political liberal while attending community college in New York, I can affirm you are right. I was made to feel sorry for minorities, even though I didn't know any. As you wrote below, I really didn't know what was going on except for my own little world. Without an Internet, my world views were shaped by the news, and I later understood that that news was constantly lying to show one point of view. It wasn't until I transferred to a University to get my Bachelors that I made minority friends. As we grew closer, I realized how much of my "liberal" views were motivated by media lies and social inexperience. You can only understand "liberal guilt" in hindsight. Clinton knew how to reach across the isle and build a consensus. He was great at that. But if you look at Obama's history, you see that he has never been told "no" in any career environment. That first "no" builds character. I was a complete success in my career, but when I experienced my first business defeat I had to retreat myself and regroup. No wonder Obama is reported to be in a deep depression - he has been spoiled into always getting his way. Obama brought no change. "Change" is not painting over rust, change is fixing the rust.
Some of the more interesting difference between then and now. No Embassy bombings, Cole Bombings, WTC Bombints, 9/11, etc., etc... There was reason for that and it had everything to do with who was running the country. Bank greed and financial manipulation still existed, as did debt, and deficits. The difference is, much of the waste was unintentional.
I don't have much experience of America, as I only visited there as a tourist for a week or less.. But I lived in Europe for 4 good years, and made friends with many white folks.. And I noticed, that political correctness was playing tricks with them.. Forget about racial slur, some of them were afraid to use words like 'black, Filipino etc'. They instead preferred to use a word - 'non-white'. I kept hearing "non-white people", one day I asked what the heck is a non-white? They said - well, the people who are not whites.. So I said they aint collectively known as non-white.. why don't you say 'brown people like me', And trust me this was the reply I got - "That would be Racist". I was like - How the hell is that Racist? They go - You are discriminating people. I was like - "Mate, now that is political correctness gone a little too far" Once I cracked a joke involving 4 different races, and some of them were taken aback.. One of them said - "Mate, you are from India.. Why would you say such a racist thing"? I replied - It's a joke mate, you are supposed to laugh, not find political correctness in it, you jackass. Then one day I had a heated debate with one black guy in my office over some global issues.. And he called me a 'Paki', I know it is an offensive word, but I'm me.. If you offend me, you win.. and I won't let you.. So I told him his geography was fucked up, and I was an Indie not a Paki.. Paki is Indie's son, he was mistaking father for the son.. Trust me, everyone around us exploded in laughter... So regardless of race, everyone is racist. Hell even us, Indian are Racist.. We so hate each other.. Why only White folks should feel guilty for Racism is beyond me. It's not the case mate.. American Embassies and American people are being attacked frequently since 70s -
The funny thing was when I lived in Costa Rica and hung out with people from Costa Rica and the United States for the most part and it was the Costa Ricans who told Nicaraguan jokes non stops and the Americans tried hard not to laugh.
LoL. That is soo true. Nicaraguans are the "Mexicans" of Costa Rica, sneaking across the border, taking jobs, committing all the crimes (according to Costa Ricans). Looking at them, you couldn't tell them apart from Costa Ricans, but they remain the butt of all the jokes. The only way I was able to tell them apart is that the Nicaraguans were willing to do twice the work for half the money .
"How do you know a Nicaraguan broke into your house? All the food you threw away is missing from the garbage can and the dog is bleeding out of his ass." "What is the different between a Nicaraguan man and a large pizza? A large pizza can feed a family of 5." Just two examples. lol
No, I get the reference of 1992.. I was confused about what was your question.. Was I in Europe in 1992, or was there a bombing in 1992.. But I think I get it now.. Yes, there was not a single attack in the tenure of G.H.W. Bush, happened before he took the office, and right after he left the office. I don't know if he was a better president than Clinton, but he seemed better than his son and Obama. Even his Son G.W. Bush was way better than Obama.
I don't know anything about him.. When I was old enough to read the news about world politics, Monica Lewinsky was giving blow-jobs to Clinton. And when I was old enough to understand the world politics, terrorists were flying plains into buildings..
The Grace Commission Report was about examining the function of the IRS and Reagan was active in shining some light into the financial flow of the tax payer's money. He was very critical of the Federal Reserve Board as well and when first getting into office was eager to attack wasteful spending without holding back when it came to following the money trail all the way to the banking top. Unfortunately after he was shot in 1981, he backed off yet the ball he once kicked continued to roll, but the fire behind the mission was gone and pretty much everything the Grace Commission Report included in 1984 was made notice of but not a thing of importance resulted from it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Grace_Commission "100% of what is collected is absorbed solely by interest on the Federal Debt ... all individual income tax revenues are gone before one nickel is spent on the services taxpayers expect from government." -Grace Commission report submitted to President Ronald Reagan - January 15, 1984 However: Not only hasn't anything changed, it has gotten worse and everything we see today could have been prevented had Reagan continued his initial eagerness.
Strange... Rasmussen, who has been accused of being biased to the right, has Obama's approval rating at a high of 44%. Meanwhile, James Carville's DemocracyCorps, run by Democrats for Democrats, has Obama's approval rating at only 40%.
Nothing strange there. To a democrat having an opinion or independent thought = "biased". I'm sure they would spin this into something positive and still consider Rasmussen biased.
Obama's approval ratings in the swing states is only 40%: LINK "Obama's job-approval rating in the swing states is just 40%, well below the level of past presidents who have won second terms and below the 45% rating he gets in other states. His support sags especially low among men and among white, non-Hispanic voters. Only about one-third of those groups say they approve of the job Obama is doing as president."
Most of the people who voted for Obama are IMO either freeloaders or sentimental people who wished the 60s had never been infiltrated. Only problem: Obama was the biggest fraud in history yet.
And this is why his approval remains so high. That 40% represents the near 1/2 of Americans who do nothing to contribute to the betterment of society.